6 ms·

Node.js Foundation – Node.js and Io.js Convergence Repo

79 points by tilt 12y ago

DigitalSea 12y ago
I really do hope the Node.js and Io.js projects do converge and work with one another. This is a promising and great sign, I hope the wonderful work and participation of both sides continues as this will ultimately benefit everyone from both sides in the end. Competition is good, cooperation is better.
andyfleming 12y ago
Looks like an official effort to merge the projects from what I can tell. Hopefully it will work out! "This project is operating with the oversight of the joint Node.js and io.js core technical teams."
drinchev 12y ago
As far as this repo is a fork of IO.js i'm not sure this is going to work out as a "merge". I think Joyent should consider their defeat and recover the bridges they've burned. On the other hand, it would be amazing if I could do brew install node and get iojs on my Mac.
- m3Lith 12y ago
  As they've said, the "merge" would most likely happen as a forked io.js repo with cherry-picked commits from node's repo.
- elisee 12y ago
  The (draft) convergence plan details how the merger is likely to be handled, including on the technical side: https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy/blob/master/convergence.md#converging-the-projects https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy/blob/master/convergenc... EDIT: Hmm, didn't see this one linked from the OP: https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy. Not sure why there are two documents with similar purpose.
  - drinchev 12y ago
    I didn't see that too. I wish both teams seamless convergence! It's a great news for the community. I hope business guys will not modify this in a non-sense way.
- gtf21 12y ago
  Just use `brew install nvm` and `nvm install iojs`
  - utunga 12y ago
    woosh
Joe8Bit 12y ago
I understand there a lots of governance/no technical differences, but is there a clear answer as to why Joyent can't use 'fast forward' Node to the current IO.js stable? Are there major discrepancies between the roads the two teams have taken that would necessitate a 'merge' of the two projects?
- 4ad 12y ago
  Yes. And this is the reason I can't take people who advocate io.js seriously. They either didn't do their homework, or have a bizarre set of requirements from software. Joyent did lots of improvements in node.js observability with DTrace and mdb providers. This was one of the very first thing that broke after io.js forked. Yes, releasing a new release every week is more important than being to debug, profile, and understand your application.
  - Joe8Bit 12y ago
    As far as I understood, removing MDB was an unfortunate side-effect of upgrading V8 to a newer version[0], and while I can see this would be an issue for some people, I would argue that bumping V8 and the performance and core language improvements that come with it is worth it! But I perfectly see you're point. Also, this is going to be an issue for Node core too eventually, unless they plan to stay on an old version of V8 indefinitely. Not sure what you're referring to about DTrace issues in IO.JS, could you provide some guidance? 0: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/pull/1023 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/pull/1023
    - 4ad 12y ago
      DTrace works exactly like mdb, it requires knowledge about V8 internals. The problem is haphazardly upgrading the V8 version without thinking about the consequences. This is not how you do release engineering, especially since io.js is advertised as stable. Stable doesn't mean "it works for me", it means you provide some formal guarantees to downstream consumers about the stability of exposed interfaces. I'm very well aware that some (most?) people don't care about things like good introspection support and stability, but it's pretty pathetic to see factual information being downvoted because people don't agree with the message.

79 points by tilt 12y ago

I really do hope the Node.js and Io.js projects do converge and work with one another. This is a promising and great sign, I hope the wonderful work and participation of both sides continues as this will ultimately benefit everyone from both sides in the end. Competition is good, cooperation is better.

andyfleming 12y ago

Looks like an official effort to merge the projects from what I can tell. Hopefully it will work out! "This project is operating with the oversight of the joint Node.js and io.js core technical teams."

drinchev 12y ago

As far as this repo is a fork of IO.js i'm not sure this is going to work out as a "merge". I think Joyent should consider their defeat and recover the bridges they've burned. On the other hand, it would be amazing if I could do brew install node and get iojs on my Mac.

m3Lith 12y ago
As they've said, the "merge" would most likely happen as a forked io.js repo with cherry-picked commits from node's repo.
elisee 12y ago
The (draft) convergence plan details how the merger is likely to be handled, including on the technical side: https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy/blob/master/convergence.md#converging-the-projects https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy/blob/master/convergenc... EDIT: Hmm, didn't see this one linked from the OP: https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy https://github.com/jasnell/dev-policy. Not sure why there are two documents with similar purpose.
- drinchev 12y ago
  I didn't see that too. I wish both teams seamless convergence! It's a great news for the community. I hope business guys will not modify this in a non-sense way.
gtf21 12y ago
Just use `brew install nvm` and `nvm install iojs`
- utunga 12y ago
  woosh

Joe8Bit 12y ago

I understand there a lots of governance/no technical differences, but is there a clear answer as to why Joyent can't use 'fast forward' Node to the current IO.js stable? Are there major discrepancies between the roads the two teams have taken that would necessitate a 'merge' of the two projects?

4ad 12y ago
Yes. And this is the reason I can't take people who advocate io.js seriously. They either didn't do their homework, or have a bizarre set of requirements from software. Joyent did lots of improvements in node.js observability with DTrace and mdb providers. This was one of the very first thing that broke after io.js forked. Yes, releasing a new release every week is more important than being to debug, profile, and understand your application.
- Joe8Bit 12y ago
  As far as I understood, removing MDB was an unfortunate side-effect of upgrading V8 to a newer version[0], and while I can see this would be an issue for some people, I would argue that bumping V8 and the performance and core language improvements that come with it is worth it! But I perfectly see you're point. Also, this is going to be an issue for Node core too eventually, unless they plan to stay on an old version of V8 indefinitely. Not sure what you're referring to about DTrace issues in IO.JS, could you provide some guidance? 0: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/pull/1023 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/pull/1023
  - 4ad 12y ago
    DTrace works exactly like mdb, it requires knowledge about V8 internals. The problem is haphazardly upgrading the V8 version without thinking about the consequences. This is not how you do release engineering, especially since io.js is advertised as stable. Stable doesn't mean "it works for me", it means you provide some formal guarantees to downstream consumers about the stability of exposed interfaces. I'm very well aware that some (most?) people don't care about things like good introspection support and stability, but it's pretty pathetic to see factual information being downvoted because people don't agree with the message.