-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 101
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Is there a timeline for the planned merge into quickjs? #374
Comments
We don't have a precise timeline, but there is willingness from both sides. You might have seen @chqrlie contributing to this repo, he is one of the original authors. |
Hello, |
Hi folks, just wanted to check. After the merging, which repository would be the canonical origin/upstream repository of Thank you for all the work folks! |
We haven't talked about that yet. |
Ah got it, thanks for the quick response! Will monitor this repository for future developments and updates then. |
Is it possible to create a todo list so that community members can also participate? Although it may not be possible to submit code directly, a large number of third-party libraries based on qjs need to be updated. Changes to qjs-ng header files and integrated patches may affect the upstream. I believe community members will want to provide some help |
Not a bad idea! We have tried, hard, not to change APIs just because, so unless you are using new APIs they should be source compatible. I'll try to start a list of the differences. |
It sounds like this effort is just getting underway (which is great). I'd like to encourage discussion about the versioning scheme that this will land on. I noticed this repo uses semantic versioning with project releases while the bellard mirror uses a calendar versioning approach with simple downloads. This can impact community-driven tooling that starts to surface around this (like version managers & build tools). My $0.02 (fwiw): I'd encourage the use of semver with project releases to align with how most other engines/runtimes handle releases. |
@coreybutler I agree semantic versioning is preferable. Will work on converging that soon. |
See #258 (reply in thread) for the latest on qjs vs. qjs-ng Given that, this issue can likely be closed? |
Some projects considering the compatibility of quickjs-ng will face the implementation of the function after the quikcjs-ng merged into quickjs, due to quickjs-ng added a lot of functionality and header files have been changed a lot, need to do a lot of work in order to be compatible, so whether there is a clear merge into quickjs schedule?
If there is a short term plan (maybe half a year?), I'd like to see it. then the adaptation work will be worthwhile.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: