JOSS: Use standard packaging and installation approaches

[engnadeau]

• Using standard packaging and installation approaches helps foster external collaboration and reduces issues/errors, especially when robust tools with their own checks are leveraged (e.g., npm, yarn, make, pip)
• This is especially important for security and SecOps, which is very strict in clinical/medical environments
• The current installation approach has the user running untrusted scripts, downloading artifacts from external servers, modifying files/folders/paths, unzipping archives, and running powershell subprocesses
• Many of the above steps would be flagged in a (properly) secure IT environment (e.g., powershell is often blocked on most PCs in well-maintained IT environments)
• Moverover, there is code duplication between windows vs linux installation scripts (e.g., forward vs backslashes)
• If standard installation or packaging tools were used, duplications and security issues would be resolved, as these tools are platform agnostic
• Given that downloadDeps.sh appears to focus on js installation, I'd recommend a js-based package manager (e.g., npm or yarn)
• cc [REVIEW]: Kinematics-vis: A Visualization Tool for the Mathematics of Human Motion openjournals/joss-reviews#3490

[klevis-a]

Closing this based on our discussion in openjournals/joss-reviews#3490.

[klevis-a]

@nnadeau I actually got around to using standard packaging (yarn and webpack). See #20.