3 ms·
This is interesting, and a very big business move to make the switch. Does this say something for the future of Node?
by kikki 12y ago
This is interesting, and a very big business move to make the switch. Does this say something for the future of Node?
- xasos 12y agoI though the whole point of io.js was that they would work on the project faster than Node, but eventually merge back into Node once Joyent became more transparent. The Node release cycle was pretty slow and they had some dispute with the contributors (top 5 original Node contributors now working on io.js)
- cpeterso 12y agoWhy would the io.js team bother merging their changes "upstream" to Node? io.js has momentum and mindshare.
- Wintamute 12y agoThey publicly stated they will merge back in upstream eventually all being well. They're doing it for the good of Node.js, not to create a rift and divide the community's efforts.
- mcantelon 12y agoIIRC the Node Forward initiative was more explicitly focussed on merging back than io.js is. The subtext of io.js seems to be "we'll move forward with or without Node moving foward with us".
- xasos 12y agoYup. Also because Joyent asked that Node Forward not use the "node" term, even though it was in public domain a lot longet than Joyent's been around.
- blacktulip 12y agoI would not think the merge back is going to happen. The longer they separate, the more unlikely (and apparently harder) for them to merge