Yeah, because no one ever had any problems with Maven, that thing is like package heaven, it's all rainbows and unicorns!
Just because somebody points out serious flaws or problems with one technology does not automatically mean that he or she thinks that other, unrelated-yet-similar technologies aren't flawed or are somehow perfect.
That is what I was responding to directly. The implication from the statement was that npm flaws (i.e certificate changes that break everything) is a good reason to switch to Java.
It isn't at all a good reason to switch to java, as java's equivalent would easily waste more time than even this rather embarrassing certificate problem with npm.
> unrelated-yet-similar technologies
It is related, and similar, it is a like-for-like comparison between nodejs package management and java package management.
Works fine for me. Has a healthy ecosystem of 3rd-party artifact repository implementations.
As someone who has used it daily for the past 5.5 years - not really. That said, I'd prefer something like Gradle, but I can't fault Maven for just working, goddamnit.
I'm not sure you get how threading works, but this thread originated from the above quote. And comparing npm with Maven given the above statement is relevant, given it is the primary "Package management" system for Java, much like npm.
If you had some information about Maven callously performing a user-hostile update, the comparison would be appropriate. As it is you're just relying on "lolz, Java sucks" as a form of argument.
I'm saying Maven isn't better, nor would npm's mistake be a good reason to switch from to Java from Node.
npm didn't perform a user-hostile update, they made a mistake with certificate authorities.
How many 0-days have forced a java upgrade on people... was that a 'user hostile' move by sun/oracle.
I think your line of reasoning is utterly ridiculous, and you are responding to words I didn't say.