-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 297
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
Use any-promise? #71
Comments
Good pointer @KenPowers ! We were already discussing in issue #65 how to move forward considering that more and more people will want to switch to native promises. any-promise could be the perfect solution. I'll look into it. BTW, |
I mentioned in #65 that |
we deprecated |
Thanks for the info @jonathanong ! I guess it is time that I start working on the new Request-Promise version. |
would also be nice to not include bluebird as a dependency, especially because the current version is out of date. i'm a stickler for duplicate dependencies in my tree :) |
Agreed, @jonathanong. When |
Bluebird is still much faster than native promises and I've run into cases where this was an issue with Also note, bluebird still has much easier to debug semantics :) |
Hey buddies, I just released All three libraries share the same core and will be maintained in parallel. The migration is straight forward so feel free to choose the Promise implementation you like best. Thanks everyone for contributing to this discussion. Cheers! |
Do you think it would make sense to use
any-promise
for this library? While I personally *love Bluebird, I don't see any Bluebird-specific functionality being used and this would allow for people to pick their own Promise library (or go native).I noticed that
bluebird-cls
is included as a dependency, butcontinuation-local-storage
is a dev dependency. Maybe, if this library were to go the route of usingany-promise
, it would make sense to movebluebird
andbluebird-cls
todevDependencies
for testing purposes and then either move therequire
ofbluebird-cls
to a test or gate it off usingprocess.env.NODE_ENV !== "production"
so it could be trimmed out with something like Envify.Open to hearing your thoughts.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: