The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development

Post by z3t4 » Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 5:45 PM UTC

omegote wrote: post #9

kowdermeister wrote: post #6

I don't see the need for this to cherry pick a few project and push them with the Linux brand. The JS landscape is fragmented for a good reason and I don't see that as problem in fact, rather as a feature. With NPM and YARN we already have a good enough package management system and their platform can help me evaluate if a package is community supported enough. I'm talking about the stats that I can just check: numbe…

How can you find the js fragmentation a feature and not a stinking pile of shit? Seriously.

Post by throwaway98237 » Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 5:50 PM UTC

ysavir wrote: post #110

throwaway98237 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when has, as relates to the web, standardization above all else been a thing. The web's design was intentionally decentralized and has led to occasional Cambrian Era level explosions of features and tools, that simply manifest. If we "try" to make the next platform, we'll probably fail. If we keep on keeping on, and let it happen, we will certainly succeed. Centralized, profit driven organizations certainly ben…

That's a great attitude for the browser--and I completely agree that decentralization is important for the browser--but does your opinion here extend to server-side JS as well?

Post by lucideer » Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 6:39 PM UTC

tracker1 wrote: post #100

dsp1234 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just "their own tools"[0]. webpack moment jquery mocha lodash eslint grunt [0] - https://js.foundation/projects/

I don't think that qUnit, jquery*, or requirejs should be in the list of the tools we should be standardizing on today. Beyond that grunt and dojo are arguable. This looks like a list of mostly last-gen tools combined with a few tools that have kept up or still serve a purpose. In the end, I just don't think it's a great list... webpack, moment, lodash, sure... but jQuery UI, really? I mean bootstrap is a bit long in…

Post by randall » Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 7:16 PM UTC

fenomas wrote: post #74

randall wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is keeping up. It's simple if you can pay attention, but if you're still on angular 1.x because you have other things to worry about, the fragmentation and pace means you can get years behind if you're not careful. It's not like ruby has another package manager every 6 months. I agree the many implementations probably are a feature, not a bug, but still induce fatigue. It's too easy to get behind.

Maybe I'm missing something really fundamental, but why try to keep up with everything? It's a huge ecosystem and any given dev/team can only use a tiny bit of it. If a library does everything you need it to, does it matter if you're years behind on it? (modulo e.g. security fixes) I mean, certainly I agree that trying to keep current on everything would be a nightmare. But surely that's just the result of lots of pe…

Post by wodencafe » Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 8:27 PM UTC

shadowfox wrote: post #116

na85 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Where are the main actors like Facebook, Google, Microsoft or Netflix? I'd argue that the main actors (and others) have driven the web backwards, not forwards. They've done this by the push towards capturing consumers in a walled garden, the rejection of open standards, the embrace of DRM, the selling of user private data for profit, etc. You listed companies I'd invite to sit on the board of some kind of User Track…

> I'd argue that the main actors (and others) have driven the web backwards, not forwards. They've done this by the push towards capturing consumers in a walled garden, the rejection of open standards, the embrace of DRM, the selling of user private data for profit, etc That could well be. I just don't quite see what that has to do with moving Javascript forward.