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

creation of whatwg-stream repo and npm module #262

Closed
mcollina opened this issue Nov 1, 2018 · 9 comments
Closed

creation of whatwg-stream repo and npm module #262

mcollina opened this issue Nov 1, 2018 · 9 comments

Comments

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

mcollina commented Nov 1, 2018

I would like to create a repository, a team and a corresponding npm module named whatwg-stream, under the node org.

See nodejs/open-standards#12 for more details.

cc @joyeecheung

@benjamingr
Copy link
Member

I'd love to be a part of this. Also: cc @devsnek

@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member

A bit of bikeshedding: is it going to be whatwg-stream or stream-whatwg? Asking because we are likely to follow this convention when we want to implement other WHATWG thingy later. whatwg-* may be sorted better and easier to search I guess, but we use the url-whatwg label in core for WHATWG URLs - that can be easily modified, though

@devsnek
Copy link
Member

devsnek commented Nov 1, 2018

what if we just put our modules in the open standards group repo, as a monorepo

@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member

joyeecheung commented Nov 1, 2018

@devsnek I'd prefer we don't do that: the last time we talked about the monorepo idea in automation, it never really went anywhere, also, it would be difficult to mange the commit and release access if we start out as a monorepo. I'd suggest we start small and just manage the repo separately for a start, otherwise we may be stuck at getting the tooling and process ready instead of doing actual experimental work - just because things like Lerna exists doesn't mean there will be people doing the extra work to actually bootstrap everything. It's not going to be too late if we want to merge multiple repos into one later.

@mcollina
Copy link
Member Author

mcollina commented Nov 1, 2018

I think monorepo are great if you want to have a single release and testing process. I don’t see how it would be the case for other standards-related modules.

I proposed whatwg-stream because of readable-stream. I’m really not fond of the name, so any help in that regard is welcomed.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Nov 1, 2018

+1 to a new repo for whatwg streams (whatever y'all wanna call it).

@dshaw
Copy link
Contributor

dshaw commented Nov 2, 2018

+1 for creating the repo. +1 for whatwg-stream. -1 for monorepo, we're too loosely coupled for that to be effective IMO.

@joyeecheung Perhaps we can update the url-whatwg to be whatwg-url for symmetry.

@mcollina
Copy link
Member Author

mcollina commented Nov 6, 2018

Repo and team created! We can always change the name later on.

@mcollina mcollina closed this as completed Nov 6, 2018
@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member

I've renamed the url-whatwg label to whatwg-url in core, FWIW (this does make it more aligned with what we have in the test names)

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