I don't think I misunderstood your point at all. Your comment here seems to be splitting hairs between whether I think that you are claiming that you "have to" fix things or whether you are claiming we "should" fix things. I don't think that the distinction between "have to" or "should" is particularly relevant.

You're right that the JS community is quick to dump a project. You're also right that sometimes code is beyond saving and it's better to start afresh. As someone who claims to be an outsider to the JS community, maybe you don't understand just how broken NPM is, and how much we welcome the appearance of something like Yarn.

This is the real beauty of having a separate package repository and package manager, and the beauty of open source software when it's made out of components with well-defined interfaces. Yarn can still use the NPM repository, but Yarn will suffer from far fewer of the deficiencies that NPM has. The exact same thing has happened in other communities many times. Haskell went from Cabal to Stack, Python went from easy_install to pip, and most Linux distros have been through their fair share of package managers. As someone who has personally migrated from Cabal to Stack and from easy_install to pip, the change from NPM to Yarn seems familiar.

Or in other words, the replacement of NPM (the package manager) with Yarn is a healthy thing that is happening for good reasons (because reporting issues, writing documentation, and submitting PRs will not make NPM do what you want, and saying that we "should" do those things is wrong).