Skip to content
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

Open
ahaoboy opened this issue Apr 12, 2024 · 10 comments
Open

Is there a timeline for the planned merge into quickjs? #374

ahaoboy opened this issue Apr 12, 2024 · 10 comments

Comments

@ahaoboy
Copy link

ahaoboy commented Apr 12, 2024

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.

@saghul
Copy link
Contributor

saghul commented Apr 12, 2024

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.

@chqrlie
Copy link
Collaborator

chqrlie commented Apr 12, 2024

Hello,
My plan is to converge by fall '24, so stay tuned. In any case, the APIs should be identical by then if not sooner.
Best
Chqrlie.

@jamestiotio
Copy link

Hi folks, just wanted to check. After the merging, which repository would be the canonical origin/upstream repository of quickjs? Would it be this repository or Bellard's mirror?

Thank you for all the work folks!

@saghul
Copy link
Contributor

saghul commented Apr 22, 2024

We haven't talked about that yet.

@jamestiotio
Copy link

Ah got it, thanks for the quick response! Will monitor this repository for future developments and updates then.

@ahaoboy
Copy link
Author

ahaoboy commented Apr 22, 2024

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
We can even summarize the issues we had during the upgrade process, and give some documentation explaining the header changes and how to use the new api.

@saghul
Copy link
Contributor

saghul commented Apr 22, 2024

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.

@coreybutler
Copy link

coreybutler commented Jun 7, 2024

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.

@chqrlie
Copy link
Collaborator

chqrlie commented Jun 7, 2024

@coreybutler I agree semantic versioning is preferable. Will work on converging that soon.

@p-bakker
Copy link

p-bakker commented Nov 17, 2024

See #258 (reply in thread) for the latest on qjs vs. qjs-ng

Given that, this issue can likely be closed?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants