@@ -626,19 +626,19 @@ noteForPortsInPackage =
626 [ D.toSimpleNote $
626 [ D.toSimpleNote $
627 "One of the major goals of the package ecosystem is to be completely written\
627 "One of the major goals of the package ecosystem is to be completely written\
628 \ in Elm. This means when you install an Elm package, you can be sure you are safe\
628 \ in Elm. This means when you install an Elm package, you can be sure you are safe\
629− \ from security issues (like code that runs side-effects on install) and that you\
629+ \ from security issues on install and that you are not going to get any runtime\
630− \ are not going to get any runtime exceptions coming from your new dependency.\
630+ \ exceptions coming from your new dependency. This design also sets the ecosystem\
631− \ This design also sets the Elm ecosystem up well to target other platforms (like\
631+ \ up to target other platforms more easily (like mobile phones, WebAssembly, etc.)\
632− \ mobile phones, WebAssembly, etc.) since no community code explicitly depends on\
632+ \ since no community code explicitly depends on JavaScript even existing."
633− \ JavaScript even existing."
634 , D.reflow $
633 , D.reflow $
635 "Given that overall goal, allowing ports in packages would lead to some pretty\
634 "Given that overall goal, allowing ports in packages would lead to some pretty\
636 \ surprising behavior. If ports were allowed in packages, you could install a\
635 \ surprising behavior. If ports were allowed in packages, you could install a\
637 \ package but not realize that it brings in an indirect dependency that defines a\
636 \ package but not realize that it brings in an indirect dependency that defines a\
638 \ port. Now you have a program that does not work and the fix is to realize that\
637 \ port. Now you have a program that does not work and the fix is to realize that\
638+ \ some JavaScript needs to be added for a dependency you did not even know about.\
639− \ some JavaScript needs to be added. That would be extremely frustrating! So why\
639+ \ That would be extremely frustrating! \"So why not allow the package author to\
640− \ not allow the package author to include the necessary JS code as well? Now we\
640+ \ include the necessary JS code as well?\" Now we are back in conflict with our\
641− \ are back in conflict with our goals for the ecosystem overall."
641+ \ overall goal to keep all community packages free from runtime exceptions."