> Namespace is not a solution for name squatting: namespace is just yet another identifier that can be squatted. If you are worried about squatting, the only effective solution is sandboxing, everything else is just moving the goal post.
The problems crates.io struggles with have never been an issue with Maven, regardless of how creatively you try to redefine words.
How can you be that sure? :-) It is not even like that Maven repositories don't suffer from malicious packages with confusing names (for example, [1])...
That seems to be an absolute win to be honest.
Not sure how you think this is helping your case.
Maven Central people nuked the artifact that may have caused confusion, and if the owners try anything like that again, it's likely their domain will be banned from publishing.
Yes, but that's not unique to Maven because virtually all software repositories have such policies. If that's about the required amount of "moderation" you claim, I don't see how Maven can even be considered better than others.
Maybe you wanted to say that policies do not imply actual "moderation". But that is demonstrably false, there are documented cases where crates.io removed packages solely because they were malicious and all those cases happened as soon as possible for crates.io. So Maven Central has to do something more in order to be ever considered better than crates.io, but I have no idea---it accepts any well-formed uploads after all. Do elaborate on that.
The problems crates.io struggles with have never been an issue with Maven, regardless of how creatively you try to redefine words.
That's a fact. Deal with it.