Should General have a guideline or rule preventing registration of vibe-coded packages?

sdanisch · October 17, 2025, 4:38pm

That sounds like a great solution!
This could actually also be a good solution for this issue:

How to treat dual licenses

opened 05:41PM - 10 Oct 25 UTC

Had a quick chat with @StefanKarpinski about [BonitoBook's](https://bonitobook.o…rg/website/) dual license ([PolyForm](https://github.com/SimonDanisch/BonitoBook.jl/blob/main/LICENSE) + commercial) disqualifying it from General registry. I get the reasoning behind it, but its kind of sad, that I cant use any of the nice registry features (search, discoverability, compatibility checks, versions) for a package, which I'm totally fine to distribute free of charge, since I only want to charge for heavy usage. Some notes from our chat: Registry already ships some non-OSS artifacts, so policy may be worth discussing. Custom registry for one package creates worse UX than URL installation. Some Solutions: * Multiple official registries with prompt on first Pkg use where users select which to enable * Maybe have an official permissive dual license which doesn't have restrictions for distribution by Pkg * User prompt when installing packages with non-OSS licenses for first time I guess some of these ideas are longer out in future, but I was wondering if there's also any short term solution to get BonitoBook easy to install and depend on.

Topic		Replies	Views
The present and the future of package registration Package Management	80	2333	June 11, 2023
Please more bureaucracy on package registrations! Package Management	20	1232	June 11, 2023
Reduce package registration waiting period Meta Discussion	83	4048	June 10, 2020
General registry T&Cs and a warning to noobs (like me) General Usage	21	1327	March 12, 2019
How can we create a leaner ecosystem for Julia? Statistics package , proposal , time-series , machine-learning	101	10462	October 15, 2020

Should General have a guideline or rule preventing registration of vibe-coded packages?

Related topics