Jamen Marz

Another thing to bare in mind... If the user serves up their own packages (decentralized), what goes to say that they cannot modify (or in `left-pad`'s case, unpublish) the "published"...

I think using `/` is perfectly fine. I think would prefer that over anything else... Here is an idea on how to manage it: Having packages in the `node_modules` folder,...

I would just follow the convention all the way through, to remove confusion: ``` javascript "dependencies": { "foo/bar": "" } ``` Doesn't look too unnatural to me with the `/org`...

@xzer: Lets say hypothetically that this package manager did have multi-level namespaces... I think the file system should reflect that directly... It keeps it simple for the user and package...

@KlonD90: Certainly quite the circumstance to run into... Perhaps the `:` in combination with the directory paths, to delimit a new path (or even a no-path name): ``` javascript "dependencies":...

That is good point. The domain name (or something similar) could simply be used for the namespace: `kik.com/kik`, `kik.de/kik`, `kik-app/kik`, etc.... With my aliasing suggestion though, it doesn't really matter...

Same way I described above. Reflect in the file system: ``` node_modules └── kik.com └── kik ├── index.js ├── package.json └── README.md ```

This is exciting! I'm not an expert with IPFS, but for the record there is also a growing [IPLD](https://github.com/ipld/ipld) standard (by the same folks) that is a more generic way...

I think having to develop two different functionalities for one project just because they are in different environments is silly. I agree with the rest, Browserify or Webpack will do,...

I don't have an answer, but I have a guess... Could your system (or terminal) be using a "fallback font" to supply missing Unicode characters, and these symbols never existed...