5 ms·

Release proposal: v2.0.0 (io.js)

98 points by antouank 12y ago

spion 12y ago
Cool, looks like the url parsing bottleneck will be removed. This means io.js 2.0 should be surpassing node by 2x on some of the TechEmpower benchmarks (provided they add it to the tests). Thanks petka :)
SEJeff 12y ago
So did io.js decide to turn down the proposal from the node upsteam folks to merge and turn it into a non-joyent controlled foundation? Seems sad to take so much brand and toss it down the toilet even if most of the development has moved to io.js.
- AndrewHampton 12y ago
  I've been listening to the iojs technical committee calls and they're moving forward with that in parallel with new development. It sounds like they think the merge is likely, but not guaranteed, and it may be a months long process. So they don't want to stop development for that much time and wait for the merge to complete.
  - random28345 12y ago
    Diverging more, and obstensibly adding more value over the "baseline" node.js, gives the io.js committers more "leverage" in governance discussions. It also arguably reduces the chances of a successful reunification. Still, it's a good thing overall. There's enough interest in Javascript that demand for a javascript application server isn't going away, and having a headline project that pushes the envelope is a way to keep innovation and interest in the ecosystem.
  - SEJeff 12y ago
    Thanks for the info, as an outsider, it is a bit difficult to wade into the long discussions.
  - Siecje 12y ago
    Wouldn't it be better to use io.js as the code base?
  - serve_yay 12y ago
    Interesting, thanks for the info.
  - Flenser 12y ago
    I hope Bryan Cantrill will do a follow up of sorts to Corporate Open Source Anti-patterns[1] once this is all settled. It would be interesting to know what lessons there are to learn from this. [1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pm8P4oCIY3g https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pm8P4oCIY3g
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- untog 12y ago
  I can see a situation where we end up with both - io.js as the 'unstable' branch, that merges back into Node at milestones. Nothing announced here would stop that.
dingdingdang 12y ago
Superb, more competition for Node.js is a bonus for everyone.
fcanela 12y ago
Any idea about which changes motivated the major version bump?

98 points by antouank 12y ago

spion 12y ago

Cool, looks like the url parsing bottleneck will be removed. This means io.js 2.0 should be surpassing node by 2x on some of the TechEmpower benchmarks (provided they add it to the tests). Thanks petka :)

SEJeff 12y ago

So did io.js decide to turn down the proposal from the node upsteam folks to merge and turn it into a non-joyent controlled foundation? Seems sad to take so much brand and toss it down the toilet even if most of the development has moved to io.js.

AndrewHampton 12y ago
I've been listening to the iojs technical committee calls and they're moving forward with that in parallel with new development. It sounds like they think the merge is likely, but not guaranteed, and it may be a months long process. So they don't want to stop development for that much time and wait for the merge to complete.
- random28345 12y ago
  Diverging more, and obstensibly adding more value over the "baseline" node.js, gives the io.js committers more "leverage" in governance discussions. It also arguably reduces the chances of a successful reunification. Still, it's a good thing overall. There's enough interest in Javascript that demand for a javascript application server isn't going away, and having a headline project that pushes the envelope is a way to keep innovation and interest in the ecosystem.
- SEJeff 12y ago
  Thanks for the info, as an outsider, it is a bit difficult to wade into the long discussions.
- Siecje 12y ago
  Wouldn't it be better to use io.js as the code base?
- serve_yay 12y ago
  Interesting, thanks for the info.
- Flenser 12y ago
  I hope Bryan Cantrill will do a follow up of sorts to Corporate Open Source Anti-patterns[1] once this is all settled. It would be interesting to know what lessons there are to learn from this. [1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pm8P4oCIY3g https://youtube.com/watch?v=Pm8P4oCIY3g
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
untog 12y ago
I can see a situation where we end up with both - io.js as the 'unstable' branch, that merges back into Node at milestones. Nothing announced here would stop that.

dingdingdang 12y ago

Superb, more competition for Node.js is a bonus for everyone.

fcanela 12y ago

Any idea about which changes motivated the major version bump?