It looks like a nice package, and I am very happy to see that more and more people are publishing packages, despite of WRI's rather weak support for package developers and package development.
I was very disappointed to read this in the recent blog post:
Minimal dependencies (no collections of competing libraries from different sources with independent and shifting compatibility).
It sounds as if the goal were to explicitly avoid structuring Mathematica into packages in a logical way (everything goes into System) and want Mathematica to have everything built-in and Mathematica users to not rely on third-party packages. That's impossible, WRI doesn't have the resources to produce even a tiny fraction of what we users need.
But, as disappointing as this public statement is (there are several other things in the blog post suggesting the same attitude), that's a discussion for another time.
Unfortunately, it does seem to me that many users are distrusting of any functionality that doesn't come from Wolfram directly. "I know you have this package but I'd rather use a built-in ..." This situation was created by Wolfram in part by not encouraging package development and not providing functionality/resources (and implying that "it should be built-in"), but also by not educating the community about good package development practices. The unfortunate truth is that many of packages out there follow at least one questionable practice, which will eventually affect those that try to use it by causing unintended side effects, breakage, all sorts of problems. No wonder people don't trust packages developed by random people.
What can the community do about this?
I would like to propose setting up an informal network of WL package developers who help and support each other by looking at each other's work, doing informal code reviews, educating each other and learning from each other.
I am going to start here and I will point out a few small things that could be improved in this package (UNET). I hope you will find it helpful.