Especially cran because it has pretty rigorous entry requirements so being in cran is a signal of at least some minimal quality.

What case is there when you want to find a package in NPM, and information about that package, using Google? If you want information about the package then it's find if the NPM package page is missing from the results - so long as you're getting the package's homepage or git repo then that's plenty. From there you can get to it's NPM page. If you know the package you're looking for, or if you know what you want to do, then searching NPM itself alone is fine.

Essentially, there is no overlap in the Venn diagram of "searching for a package" and "searching for information about a package". You want one or the other, not a results page with links to both.

If people realized this about their searches more then Google could fix a lot of spam problems.

Sometimes the top results for a package is its GitHub page; sometimes it's NPM. I don't particularly care which one it is, except that the NPM page very clearly shows the package name. But I do care that the results are there. And if NPM results disappeared from Google, I wouldn't remember to use NPM's search all the time.

Additionally, what from the argument does not apply to GitHub as well? Perhaps they're better at filtering out spam repositories, but otherwise it's the same thing - free hosting on a domain with presumably high ranking on Google. And if that is also removed from Google's results, NPM packages wouldn't show up anywhere in the search.

I don't know, if I want information about something, it seems pretty reasonable that I might do my search for that something.

For any search where you don't know what you want Google without NPM pages works fine.

For any search where you do know what you want NPM's search function works fine.

There isn't a case where you need Google to interleave pages from the wider internet with pages from NPM. You only think you want that because it's what you're used to, or because you use Google to do searches that you should really do on NPM instead.

Or you're getting a GitHub page with a similar name, or worse, a malicious GitHub page that instructs you to download the npm package you're looking for from a typo squatted version of it.

A github page really isn't what I want at all when asking questions about an npm package except for the fact that I'm used to its code browser, so I tend to click it out of habit.

More or less annoying than NPM being used for hosting spam?

So I like finding npm in my search results so I can see release history and other package metadata.

Also, like I said, npm is more trusted than lots of different developer pages so knowing something is a package is useful and not immediately apparent from going to a project page or GitHub repo.

It’s not that it’s impossible to find this info outside of npm, it’s that it’s easier to mix npm results in.

Also, generally I want to be able to search all relevant info in the universe. Trying to keep track of what exists and is excluded, especially if excluded to prevent spammers, is a waste of my thoughts.

This is exactly the point I'm making. It's very rare that you want both NPM package pages and internet results. If NPM wasn't indexed it'd solve the spam problem, and the only cost would be people would need to think about what they're looking for and use NPM's search instead when they want the package page.

That's not to say you don't have a point. It's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation with multiple underlying and partially conflicting causes (tyosquatting vs. SEO spam).

IMO, the best solution to the SEO spam is for npm to increase the burden of automated signup. Add more CAPTCHAs or even phone verification. And trigger alerts when there are suddenly thousands of new signups, or thousands of packages pushed from one account.

Also, they could add rel=nofollow to all links on the page. This would make it less of an attractive target for SEO spam (but not entirely, since the page itself might still rank highly and the spammer doesn't necessarily care about getting link juice out of it, so much as getting traffic to the npm page itself).

Coz you might want results not only from docs but stackoverflow and other places ?

> Essentially, there is no overlap in the Venn diagram of "searching for a package" and "searching for information about a package". You want one or the other, not a results page with links to both.

Of course there is. I want docs, examples, and maybe opinions vs alternatives if I look to solve problem X with external dependency.

Of course there is. I want docs, examples, and maybe opinions vs alternatives if I look to solve problem X with external dependency.

You don't need the link to the package in NPM to be in the results for either of these examples.

The broader point is that by expecting Google to be a single interface to the entire internet, and refusing to accept that there might be some places you need to go to directly, we make the problem of spam worse. Using Google for navigation when you know what site you want rather than using that site's search feature incentivizes spammers to abuse things they would otherwise ignore.

Whether that incentivized spammers to spam, or Google et al to improve their software (or risk being outcompeted), doesn’t really seem like a “me” problem. I can’t change these things.

Downloads are very easy to fake. Usually package managers don’t allow indexing until the package and its author reach a certain age. This allows the team to discover and remove the package before it is indexed.

If I Google a library and end up on npmjs.com I usually just click on a link to the library's repository or home page first.

Of course, it would disenfranchise a bit, but what is another option?

There's really no reason why the same spammer couldn't target those sites too.

Which would be trivial to automate.