About errata in Node.js Design Patterns, 3rd. edition

[oscaretu]

Dear Mario & Luciano,

I am including here an excerpt from a message I sent to Packt Publishing a few days ago.... They told me that the only way to handle the errata was to use their form, or open an issue in the GitHub repository.

I've tried to get informatión about errata in the book "Node.js design patterns", and there was no luck. I can send errata in https://www.packtpub.com/support/errata , but I can't find a page with confirmed errata or possible errata.

I'm trying to get information similar to what I can find in O'Reilly books. You can see an example here: https://www.oreilly.com/catalog/errata.csp?isbn=9781449392680

The buyers of a book should have information about errata in the books we have bought. It is a loss of valuable information not to have that information. If you don't make available that information, a buyer can't know whether some part of the book is wrong (my printed book will never be updated, even when updated editions can fix the errata). When there is no page for errata in a book, how can I decide if it is worth sending the errata I have found? Do you want everyone who finds errata to lose their time sending you erratas you already know?

Do you plan to make a page to collect the detected bugs, like O'Reilly does?

Mario / Luciano, thank you very much for writing this book. I hate Node.js, but I love your book, which is very very very very good. And I keep recommending it to my colleagues and friends who use Node.js.

Now, some typos (or possible typos) in the printed version of third edition:

• In page 185-186, there is no coherence in the positions of read. It's supposed that Transform stream is a particular case of Duplex stream, so the read function should be in the same position (it seems that the right one is the one in Figure 6.5.
• In the second line of page 191, appears "Italy." where it should say "Italy".
• In page 205, there is a mention to (a literal) cb() function, but that doesn't exist in the code of page. Do you mean the callback function of finish handler?
• In page 498, the line with worker.disconnect() is marked with // (2) instead of the right way: // (3).

Kind regards,
Oscar

[mariocasciaro]

Hi Oscar, thanks for reporting the issue. Packt have made a lot of changes in their website lately so I see that indeed the errata now is not that easy to find. I'll ask out contacts at Packt to clear up the matter.
In the meantime, thanks for reporting those typos 🤗. We'll review them and add them to the errata list.

[oscaretu]

Hello, Mario.

Do you have a file with all the errata detected (confirmed or not) that you can publish in this repository? That way, everybody can check the information.