From my perspective the main benefit of this is there is now a non profit that can take over administration of JS projects the community values but the original developers want to abandon.
Are they going to do this, however?
The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
121–130 of 134 posts
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#122A few years ago, some high profile organizations (W3C, Adobe, Facebook, Google, Hp, Intel, Microsoft, Mozilla, Nokia, Opera) came together to try to help standardize the web platform [1](Javascript, CSS, HTML). That was a HUGE failure - because it was driven by business rather than developers. How will the "Javascript foundation" do better? [1] http://webplatform.com
Developers can't be trusted to make good decisions about the tools they use either.
We're all just pretty much screwed :D
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#123"founding members include Bocoup, IBM, Ripple, Samsung, Sauce Labs, Sense Tecnic Systems, SitePen, StackPath, University of Westminster and WebsiteSetup." There's a name missing there I would have expected to see. Starts with M. Mo... mo ... something.
MomCorp?
A dearth of Futurama fans here, I see.
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#124I thought this was interesting at first. An effort to push the JS environment towards standardization is a much needed initiative. Then I saw the "initial projects" list. "Appium, contributed by Sauce Labs, is an open source Node.js server..." "Interledger.js, contributed by Ripple, enables instant payments and micropayments in any currency..." "JerryScript, contributed by Samsung, is a lightweight, fully-featured Ja…
That's quite unfair; you didn't mention that the projects also include:
* ESLint
* Grunt
* jQuery/jQuery Mobiel/jQuery UI
* Lodash
* Mocha
* Moment
* Webpack
> This made it very clear that the founding members of the "JS Foundation" are not interested in developing and promoting the best open source tools
That's an enormous chunk of what I'd call "the best open source tools". And I hardly think jQuery needs to "push" its brand on developers!
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#125I thought this was interesting at first. An effort to push the JS environment towards standardization is a much needed initiative. Then I saw the "initial projects" list. "Appium, contributed by Sauce Labs, is an open source Node.js server..." "Interledger.js, contributed by Ripple, enables instant payments and micropayments in any currency..." "JerryScript, contributed by Samsung, is a lightweight, fully-featured Ja…
Creator of Lodash here. From my experience the foundation is a pretty chill, hands off, non-profit. I sought out and voluntarily joined the Dojo Foundation early in Lodash's development (~2013). At the time the Dojo Foundation was the only JS foundation I knew of that was open to outside projects (the jQuery Foundation was really only for jQuery projects back then). Eventually the Dojo Foundation and the jQuery Foundation merged. It was great! Regardless of the name the foundation has proven valuable. Whether it's CLA management, PR bots, conduct reviews, representation at TC39, help with trademarks, licenses, legal, etc. they've always been friendly and more than happy to help. When possible they also hold events to educate and encourage new open source contributors which is pretty cool!
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
JS is a language, and my opinion is that languages should be maximally flexible. They must be maximally flexible because a language has the primary function of being the medium through which an individual might transmit their ideas. Since ideas are not limited, languages must not be limited. Server-side JS is still a language. Limiting the language will limit what can be expressed in that language. So, yes, I would s…
except that we have many languages, each of which is designed for a slightly different purpose. It is generally more useful to have a wide range of single-purpose tools that can do one job very well, rather than a general-purpose tool that can do lots of things badly.
If you want an analogy, think of a knife. It can be used to cut things very well, but also serves as a really bad screwdriver, bottle opener, toothpick, tent peg, etc. Better to have a tool for each of these tasks than cut your thumb open mis-using your knife.
We maybe need one general-purpose language for trying new stuff out (and I'd argue that that language is actually LISP). The rest need to be single-purpose, designed to do a single job.
Javascript is designed to run in browsers, and recently to run on a server (mostly as a web server). Trying to write real-time systems (for example) in javascript is a bad idea; you can do it, but you will cut your thumb open and there are much better languages available to do it in.
I think the core point I'm trying to make is that programming languages are engineer's tools rather than artistic media. We use the tools to build the thing we want. Tell an engineer that the hammer is the thing being built and they'll tell you you're an idiot.
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
JS is a language, and my opinion is that languages should be maximally flexible. They must be maximally flexible because a language has the primary function of being the medium through which an individual might transmit their ideas. Since ideas are not limited, languages must not be limited. Server-side JS is still a language. Limiting the language will limit what can be expressed in that language. So, yes, I would s…
Are you suggesting for browsers to be sandboxed execution environments ?
Then it will be more like Java Applets or Flash applications, I think some restrictions have lead to better index ability(hyperlinks, search engines) , accessibility in web.
A better medium doesn't necessarily mean untamed or freer medium. If restrictions can create a medium which has better accessibility, then maybe they are not so bad.
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#128I thought this was interesting at first. An effort to push the JS environment towards standardization is a much needed initiative. Then I saw the "initial projects" list. "Appium, contributed by Sauce Labs, is an open source Node.js server..." "Interledger.js, contributed by Ripple, enables instant payments and micropayments in any currency..." "JerryScript, contributed by Samsung, is a lightweight, fully-featured Ja…
Creator of Lodash here. From my experience the foundation is a pretty chill, hands off, non-profit. I sought out and voluntarily joined the Dojo Foundation early in Lodash's development (~2013). At the time the Dojo Foundation was the only JS foundation I knew of that was open to outside projects (the jQuery Foundation was really only for jQuery projects back then). Eventually the Dojo Foundation and the jQuery Found…
Did the jQuery Foundation have companies as sponsors? I am not familiar with how the jQuery Foundation functioned in the past. But I'm not really interested in the past--I'm curious about the future.
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#129I thought this was interesting at first. An effort to push the JS environment towards standardization is a much needed initiative. Then I saw the "initial projects" list. "Appium, contributed by Sauce Labs, is an open source Node.js server..." "Interledger.js, contributed by Ripple, enables instant payments and micropayments in any currency..." "JerryScript, contributed by Samsung, is a lightweight, fully-featured Ja…
That's quite unfair; you didn't mention that the projects also include: * ESLint * Grunt * jQuery/jQuery Mobiel/jQuery UI * Lodash * Mocha * Moment * Webpack > This made it very clear that the founding members of the "JS Foundation" are not interested in developing and promoting the best open source tools That's an enormous chunk of what I'd call "the best open source tools". And I hardly think jQuery needs to "push"…
I apologize for not making it clear that my comment on pushing brands on developers was only in reference to the for-profit organizations; I assumed that would be self evident.
Re: The Linux Foundation Unites the JavaScript Community for Open Web Development
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
moment.js is a monolithic beast. I would love to see date-fns instead https://github.com/date-fns/date-fns
Nice, ask and ye shall receive. I'm going to have to check this out. There's so much to moment though, is it missing any key features of moment?
Hi, the date-fns creator here. We don't have extended time zone support (IANA) and have much fewer translations. But all of that is in progress. Regarding date-manipulations date-fns combines all of the Moment functions and even more (that we found in other libraries; ~150 in total). Check it out: https://github.com/date-fns/date-fns