How are the trustees to know whether someone "deserves" to take a security sensitive name? And "typos" can often be intentional when two packages each deserve similar names. I think it's reasonable for trustees to step in if a name is actually abused, but I don't support squatting.

On Wed, Dec 8, 2021, 4:53 PM Carter Schonwald <carter.schonwald@gmail.com> wrote:

Yeah. Typo squatting is or case squatting in helping preventing weird security / bug issues sounds sane to me 

On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 3:00 PM Jon Purdy <evincarofautumn@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:34 AM Fumiaki Kinoshita <fumiexcel@gmail.com> wrote:

Looking at other "reserved package names in the list, "all", "project", "test" are understandable but it's hard to think of any reason why oath should be reserved.

When I first saw this thread, I guessed that it was reserved to prevent typosquatting for “oauth” (OAuth).

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries