Show HN: jpm – a JavaScript package manager in Rust, every line by Claude Code

An engineer released jpm, a JavaScript package manager written in Rust in which every line was authored by Claude Code, claiming a cold nuxt install of 591 packages on GitHub CI in 1.22 seconds versus 1.28 seconds for bun 1.4.2 and 18.54 seconds for npm 12.1.0. jpm ships as a roughly 2 MB single binary, uses 34 MB of peak memory on a nuxt CI install against npm's 387 MB, and imports existing package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, yarn.lock and bun.lock files into its own jpm.lock without registry lookups. The project's own benchmarks show jpm fastest in 9 of 12 measured cells, with npm and yarn keeping smaller CI caches because they store compressed tarballs while jpm keeps files unpacked.

Every line written by Claude Code. Directed by one engineer. Checked against everyone else's tests. ~2 MBone binary, no runtime to install 1.22 scold nuxt install on GitHub CI 34 MBmemory used to install nuxt on GitHub CI Speed Fast where your CI spends its time Three real projects, four install phases, eight package managers, against the live npm registry. On GitHub CI jpm is the fastest in 9 of 12 cells; the other three are shown as measured. Machine GitHub CI, LinuxmacOS, M4 MaxWindows 11 Phase coldwarmcirepeat Project nitronuxtnext No cache, no lockfile, no node modules. Repeat installs were not measured on Windows. Install wall time, shorter is fasterGitHub CI, Linux · nuxt · 591 packages jpm1.22 s bun1.28 s pnpm1.72 s aube3.00 s upm3.52 s deno7.64 s yarn9.63 s npm18.54 s GitHub CI, Linux, cold, nuxt · 591 packages Package manager Wall time jpm 1.22 s bun 1.4.2 1.28 s pnpm 12.8.1 1.72 s aube 2.6.0 3.00 s upm 1.3.1 3.52 s deno 2.9.6 7.64 s yarn 4.18.1 9.63 s npm 12.1.0 18.54 s jpm is the fastest here, 15× faster than npm. Defender scans every file an install writes, and it scans files written by node.exe npm, upm far more cheaply than files written by native tools like jpm, aube and pnpm. On Windows jpm is the fastest on next, not yet on nuxt. Wall time, medians: ubuntu-latest with 4 cores 5 runs , macOS on an M4 Max 5 runs and Windows 11 with Defender on 3 runs , 2026-09-30 and 2026-10-01. Full tables, with CPU time, in docs/benchmarks.md. Get started Switch in one command Run jpm install in your project. jpm imports the lockfile you have into its own jpm.lock, with the same versions. package-lock.json and npm-shrinkwrap.json npm 7+ , pnpm-lock.yaml pnpm 9+ and bun.lock are carried over as they are: the same versions and the same tree, with no registry lookups. yarn.lock, from yarn 1 or yarn 2 and later, keeps every version yarn picked. jpm asks the registry only for what yarn.lock doesn't record: peers, platforms and bins. Your old lockfile is left untouched. Delete it when you're ready. CI keeps working during the switch: jpm ci and jpm install --frozen-lockfile install from the old lockfile as it is until jpm.lock is committed. It also reads workspaces, pnpm-workspace.yaml, catalogs, overrides and resolutions, and patches. Older formats, out-of-date lockfiles and the rest: docs/migrating.md. npmpackage-lock.json pnpmpnpm-lock.yaml yarnyarn.lock bunbun.lock jpmjpm.lock jpm-lock 2 package @babel/ email protected integrity sha512-… dep @babel/generator 7.29.8 bash $ cd your-project $ jpm install reads package-lock.json / pnpm-lock.yaml / yarn.lock / bun.lock → writes jpm.lock Lean Small enough to forget it's there One binary with nothing behind it, an install that holds little in memory, and a store that keeps each file once. Not every number goes jpm's way: npm and yarn keep compressed tarballs, so their caches are smaller. jpm keeps its files unpacked, ready to link. GitHub CI, Linux, 2026-09-30. Binary sizes are the README's round figures. Binary size, approximate jpm~2 MB pnpm~60 MB bun~80 MB aube~150 MB Binary size, approximate jpm ~2 MB pnpm ~60 MB bun ~80 MB aube ~150 MB Peak memory, nuxt ci install jpm34 MB bun89 MB pnpm184 MB npm387 MB Peak memory, nuxt ci install jpm 34 MB bun 89 MB pnpm 184 MB npm 387 MB Disk after a cold nuxt install, node modules and store jpm244 MB bun261 MB pnpm290 MB npm443 MB Disk after a cold nuxt install, node modules and store jpm 244 MB bun 261 MB pnpm 290 MB npm 443 MB CI cache after a cold next install npm194 MB yarn328 MB jpm347 MB pnpm433 MB bun466 MB CI cache after a cold next install npm 194 MB yarn 328 MB jpm 347 MB pnpm 433 MB bun 466 MB Storage Each file stored once. Each package built once. jpm keeps one store per machine and builds each package's directory once, for every project that uses it. Installing again is mostly making links. A content-addressed store Each tarball is checked against its integrity, then unpacked once into ~/.jpm/store. Every file is kept once, by its hash, read-only. A global virtual store Each package is built once as an entry: name@version, plus a short digest of its dependency graph when it has dependencies. Its files are hardlinked from the store, and its dependencies are linked beside it, so it can import only what it declared. Your node modules A project's node modules links to those entries. A warm install makes only these few links: 4 ms for nitro on GitHub CI. Every other project The next project on the machine links to the same entries. When nothing changed, a repeat install checks a few links and is done in 1–2 ms. Pause the animation Next.js and Nuxt: inside the project Next's Turbopack compiles nothing outside the project, and Nuxt imports packages it doesn't declare. For a project that depends on next or nuxt, jpm builds the entries in node modules/.jpm instead, still hardlinked from the store. The safe setting is the one you get without asking. Loosening one is your call, made in your own settings, not a package's or a cloned repository's. Install scripts wait for you A dependency's install scripts, the way most npm malware runs, don't run until you jpm approve that package and version. A new version waits for approval again. New versions wait a day A version published in the last day isn't picked min-release-age , even when a package deep in the tree pins it exactly, so a hijacked release can't ride in on a pin. No surprise sources A published package can't pull in git or tarball dependencies, or paths outside itself. Only your project and its workspaces choose where code comes from. Checked before it's visible Every package is checked against its lockfile integrity before any of its files are visible to your project. No secrets in the lockfile Credentials never land in jpm.lock: tokens stay in your .npmrc, and a git URL carrying a password is refused. A cloned repo can't lower the bar A project's own .npmrc can't turn off TLS checks, swap the CA or proxy, or loosen the release age. jpm ignores those there and names them in a warning. Its own TLS, no OpenSSL jpm speaks TLS with its own code, tested against Project Wycheproof and the RFCs' vectors, and checks certificates against Mozilla's roots and your system's. Runtimes checked by signature A Node.js runtime a package asks for is checked against the release's SHASUMS256.txt, trusted only once its signature matches Node's release keys. Less to attack One ~2 MB binary, with no runtime and no dependency tree of its own to install: less code between you and the registry. Written by Claude Code. Checked by everyone else's tests. It started with an episode of the Syntax podcast that held up upm as faster and smaller than the rest. Small, because it runs on Node.js. So: what if it were ported to Rust and made small for real? And what would it take to turn an AI's one-shot into something you'd trust in CI? Claude Code, running Claude Opus 5.5, wrote every line, its own TLS and crypto included. JT Turner, an engineer of 27 years, made the calls. When Claude pushed back on writing our own TLS, the condition was: test it like we didn't trust it. So every "it works" is checked against someone else's tests: Wycheproof, the RFCs, and the suites of npm, pnpm, yarn and bun. The numbers decide. An HTTP/2 client was built, benchmarked on GitHub's runners and a desktop, found slower and hungrier for CPU, and deleted. Is jpm perfect? No. Perfect doesn't exist. There's good enough, there's great, and there's tested enough to know which one you have. Loading the counts…install scripts handed out since getjpm.sh launched Loading the counts…downloads of the jpm binary from GitHub What this counts Each time getjpm.sh hands out an install script, it adds one to a count kept for that script, the path asked for and the day. Nothing else is recorded: no IP address, no browser details, no cookies, no identifiers. We can't tell who you are or tell one person from another, and a download isn't always an install. The binary count is GitHub's own tally of downloads of jpm's release files. Both numbers refresh about once an hour.