TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Io.js community thoughts on reconciliation

89 点作者 yvoschaap2大约 10 年前

9 条评论

ZenoArrow大约 10 年前
Reading through the posts, this one struck me as the best solution...<p>&quot;Personally, what I would love to see is io.js take the Node name and handle all of the development through the community. Joyent could then select specific releases that they will support as LTS for enterprises, complete with the requisite paid support packages. That seems like it might be a scenario where everyone could win.&quot;<p>Not only is it a practical solution that fixes problems on both sides, there are examples of similar arrangements that have worked out well, such as the symbiotic relationship between RHEL and Fedora.
评论 #9318651 未加载
ffn大约 10 年前
Politics and &quot;what it may mean for the future&quot; talks aside, are there any API &#x2F; performance &#x2F; engineering differences between io and node today? I mean, there&#x27;s a lot of talk regarding why joyent is bad or how joyent did nothing wrong, but from a js user&#x27;s point of view, I&#x27;m rather more interested in the tangible non-human differences in node and io.
评论 #9317448 未加载
评论 #9317434 未加载
评论 #9317428 未加载
otoburb大约 10 年前
Despite the submitted title, the ticket history seems more like a discussion soliciting additional feedback, implying that a decision has not yet been definitively made.<p>Is that accurate? Or is the weight of the io.js community on-board and we&#x27;re only reading a vocal minority&#x27;s opinion in the github ticket?
评论 #9317639 未加载
thom_nic大约 10 年前
I rather like the idea of io.js being a faster moving fork of node. Hopefully a &quot;reconciliation&quot; would mean essentially re-naming the projects to something like &quot;node stable&quot; and &quot;node edge&quot; but maintaining both, since depending on your needs you might choose one or the other.
评论 #9317341 未加载
primitivesuave大约 10 年前
&gt; Joyent have squandered much of the trust and respect they once had and they continue to frustrate even in their involvement in the AB and Foundation discussions. Does their re-involvement in this community have an impact or do we imagine they will once again become the constructive force they used to be or perhaps they will be neutralised in a way that everyone&#x27;s happy?<p>What&#x27;s this all about?
评论 #9317457 未加载
amelius大约 10 年前
I wonder why they (both node.js and io.js) chose to use processes instead of threads to do multiprocessing, because with threads you can have at least structural sharing of immutable data structures.
评论 #9318507 未加载
bsimpson大约 10 年前
The title should be something to the effect of &quot;io.js contributors weighing pros&#x2F;cons of Node.js merge&quot;<p>Reconciling makes it sounds like they are merging. From the posts I&#x27;ve read in that thread, it seems like they&#x27;re as far apart as ever.
评论 #9317106 未加载
评论 #9317127 未加载
评论 #9317128 未加载
wesleytodd大约 10 年前
This title should be changed......
hello_moto大约 10 年前
Node seems to have tons of controversies around it ever since its inception.<p>As much as I would love to enjoy Node, I can&#x27;t. It&#x27;s just too much drama around it.<p>Strongloop, Joyent, none of these companies are guiding the Node community in the right direction (the Node community itself probably are too full of &quot;strong opinionated&quot; individuals that caused further drama).<p>Strongloop is basically a bunch of people with money, hired a few Node core contributors to get street creds (of course the Node core contribs people would be more than happy to get paid and be the face of a company... y&#x27;know, ego and money) and try to be the RedHat of Node (oh, they bought NodeFly and laid everybody off ).<p>Joyent saw &quot;gold&quot; in Node but it&#x27;s quite clear they&#x27;re having hard time to capitalize their first-mover advantages. Maybe Accounting still doesn&#x27;t like the idea of paying a bunch of people with money to support an &quot;open source project&quot; and figure out how to make money later on.<p>Hence we&#x27;re seeing how Joyent just didn&#x27;t own NodeJS and leave everybody to dust with tons of contributions... if you want to own an OSS project, invest tons of resources, make sure you own a large percentage of the codebase, deliver tons of new and exciting features, put lots of marketing behind it, and make sure people have hard time to &quot;catch up&quot; thus creating an invisible barrier to enter. Hire the smart ones that still can somehow understand the codebase and contribute effectively. Another way is by providing sub-par documentation for the public to contribute, of course that&#x27;s more &quot;evil&quot; than making it hard for individuals to get to know the codebase...<p>Now we have IO.js, a &quot;community&quot; driven with individuals who &quot;work for corporation with Node interest&quot; behind them...(those APM companies and Node-based service providers wanting to be the recognized leader in Node).<p>Let&#x27;s be honest (and be real): Node is positioned to be the next popular framework after Rails. It&#x27;s not hard to see why there are so much politics around it. The difference is that Rails has DHH as BDFL and he didn&#x27;t want to make money out of Rails (if you don&#x27;t count public speaking...) and Node has no BDFL...
评论 #9321175 未加载