Opt out of fund messaging

[36degrees]

After running npm install, npm outputs the number of packages looking for funding:

35 packages are looking for funding
run npm fund for details

We've seen one user confused by this, who then ran npm fund.

Given it's not really relevant for our users, disable the fund output to reduce the noise when running npm install.

[hannalaakso]

My personal feeling is that npm fund is a good initiative but since our users can be new to working with the terminal and can confuse the notice with instructions to get the kit running we should remove it.

[joelanman]

tricky - I can see it could cause confusion - what happened in this case, did they get stuck? One option is we could mention it in the installation instructions.

[36degrees]

tricky - I can see it could cause confusion - what happened in this case, did they get stuck? One option is we could mention it in the installation instructions.

They didn't get stuck, as far as I know. They didn't actually mention npm fund at all as they were asking about support for something else, but in the screenshot you could see that they'd basically run everything that looked like a command in the output of npm install (including npm audit, but we disabled that in #712 – they were using an older version of the kit).

Agree it's a tricky one.

I may be more inclined to leave it if the output from npm fund made it at all clear what it's for or what you were meant to do, but it looks like this:

govuk-prototype-kit@9.7.0
├─┬ glob@7.1.6, rimraf@3.0.2
│ └── url: https://github.com/sponsors/isaacs
├─┬ resolve@1.17.0, has-symbols@1.0.1, is-date-object@1.0.2, is-symbol@1.0.3, es-to-primitive@1.2.1, is-callable@1.1.5, is-regex@1.0.5, object-inspect@1.7.0, string.prototype.trimstart@1.0.1, string.prototype.trimleft@2.1.2, string.prototype.trimend@1.0.1, string.prototype.trimright@2.1.2, es-abstract@1.17.5, is-string@1.0.5, array-includes@3.1.1, object.values@1.1.1, object.fromentries@2.0.2
│ └── url: https://github.com/sponsors/ljharb
├─┬ picomatch@2.2.2
│ └── url: https://github.com/sponsors/jonschlinkert
├─┬ ansi-escapes@4.3.1, type-fest@0.11.0, figures@3.2.0, terminal-link@2.1.1, make-dir@3.1.0, p-limit@2.3.0, read-pkg-up@7.0.1, is-finite@1.1.0, globals@12.4.0
│ └── url: https://github.com/sponsors/sindresorhus
├─┬ ansi-styles@4.2.1
│ └── url: https://github.com/chalk/ansi-styles?sponsor=1
├─┬ @babel/core@7.9.6
│ ├── type: opencollective
│ └── url: https://opencollective.com/babel
├─┬ eslint@6.8.0
│ └── url: https://opencollective.com/eslint
├─┬ regexpp@3.1.0
│ └── url: https://github.com/sponsors/mysticatea
└─┬ formidable@1.2.2
  └── url: https://ko-fi.com/tunnckoCore/commissions

I wonder if there's a better way to prompt users to run npm fund that allows us to provide some additional context… but then I'm also unconvinced that the onus should be on our users to support them.

[36degrees]

I wonder if there's a better way to prompt users to run npm fund that allows us to provide some additional context…

Sorry, re-reading your comment I realise that's basically what you were suggesting here:

One option is we could mention it in the installation instructions.

[36degrees]

Going to close this for now – let's see if it comes up again through support channels.