Skip to content

The relationship to node.js is confusing #3

Description

@javajosh

Hello. I couldn't find any mention of why this project exists apart from node.js. Would love to get some clarification on that. Thanks.

Activity

  1. andrewk commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @andrewk

    Also, the README instructs to download pre-compiled binaries from node.js.org/download

  2. arunoda commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @arunoda

    Is this the new name of lib uv?

  3. arunoda commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @arunoda

    Oh. This is node 0.12 source code. Is this is a node fork?

  4. crzidea commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @crzidea

    This is node 0.12 source code.

    @arunoda Are you sure?

  5. arunoda commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @arunoda

    Yes. And just look at the people who've send PRs.

  6. Albert-IV commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @Albert-IV

    Looking at the commit history, they are pulling in changes from Joyent's repo as well.

  7. crzidea commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @crzidea

    @arunoda Glad to know.
    I can't wait to see v0.12.

  8. askmike commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @askmike

    This repo is the result of a lot of discussion in the node community about how well Joyent is performing its role.

  9. Rush commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @Rush

    It's nice to see @indutny in action :)

  10. jbergstroem commented on Nov 28, 2014

    @jbergstroem
    Member

    I think this issue would benefit from silence until people being part of the fork are in a position to talk about it. Until then, what others (like me) say is at best hearsay or speculation.

  11. rsp commented on Nov 29, 2014

    @rsp
    Contributor

    There is some information in the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8669557

  12. jbergstroem commented on Nov 29, 2014

    @jbergstroem
    Member

    @rsp: I don't see any committers contributing there. Could you possibly point to a specific comment? Looks like speculation to me :(

  13. rashthedude commented on Nov 29, 2014

    @rashthedude

    This would have been kept as a private repo if no clarifications are in place yet. I do understand that there is a power struggle in the community and some things that we could without but if nothing is done to address it then nodejs will be losing as a consequence of it. Time to pull in the same direction, ignore egocentric behaviors and drop ulterior motives for that matter.

  14. yoshuawuyts commented on Nov 29, 2014

    @yoshuawuyts

    A formal statement will probably be made soon. To my knowledge the TC / Advisory board have regular meetings and and some statement about io.js will probably be at the top of the agenda.

    As for a power struggle: all of this is just the community unchaining themselves from Joyents corporate agenda. If a rebranding most occur because Joyent won't hand over the node.js trademark to the community, then so be it.

  15. max-mapper commented on Nov 29, 2014

    @max-mapper
    Contributor

    Keep the speculation/drama on hackernews please, this is an inappropriate place for it.

  16. 39 remaining items

  17. added a commit that references this issue on Mar 20, 2026
  18. added a commit that references this issue on Jul 16, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions