Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

momentjs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 266 posts

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#71

Post by manquer »

wvenable wrote: post #20
judofyr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it’s not. Because if you’re not adding new features and pushing code changes every day, your project is abandoned, dead. To quote another thread from two minutes ago: “I’m quite sad to see the end of Moment.js” In this case, the reason why Moment.js is "dead" and not "done" is because it has fundamental flaws in its design: Mutable objects + huge bundle size which doesn't work well with tree-shaking.

If you fundamentally and incompatibly change it's design then it's an entirely new product. Calling that "Moment Version 3" doesn't mean anything.

Brand value is huge. I would trust moment 3 lot more than project I never heard of . I would trust a new projects by core authors of moment almost as much too.[1]

Trust is major factor when depending on third party libraries especially in the JS ecosystem.

[1] reason libre office or deno gains traction

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#72

Post by tutfbhuf »

bartread wrote: post #67
jasonkester wrote: post #5

Good for them. Open Source seems to have an irrational fear of done . Done is good. Done should be the goal. But it’s not. Because if you’re not adding new features and pushing code changes every day, your project is abandoned , dead . To quote another thread from two minutes ago: “I’m quite sad to see the end of Moment.js” I wish the was a way to fix this attitude. So that project maintainers didn’t need to write tw…

> I wish the was a way to fix this attitude. So that project maintainers didn’t need to write two page apologies for finishing their thing. One of the problems is that GitHub is full of OSS libraries where the last commit was three years or more ago and you have no idea (without forensically analysing commits, issues, etc.) whether it's because the project is done or because the maintainer(s) lost interest, had other…

> One of the problems is that GitHub is full of OSS libraries where the last commit was three years or more ago and you have no idea (without forensically analysing commits, issues, etc.) whether it's because the project is done or because the maintainer(s) lost interest, had other priorities, etc.

I don't think there's any at least medium sized project that is considered to be done but not abandoned/legacy and does not receive any commits.

Any non-trivial project that has no commit since the last three years is abandoned. Even in the case a project is considered to be done/finished, in order to not abandon it you have to maintain it: fix security issues, update outdated dependencies, update tooling so that you can still run/compile with non outdated tools and so on.

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#73

Post by glintik »

dmit wrote: post #52

Please pardon this drive-by assessment of JS calendar libraries by a casual user. moment.js: Mutable. Thank you, next. Luxon: Takes the effort to implement `Interval`, which would be `Range ` in any proper language, but somehow avoids providing separate `Date` and `Time` objects. Day.js: When you kinda like moment.js, but your bundler says it's too fat. date-fns: The finest of pure, curry-able functions over the mine…

"moment.js: Mutable. Thank you, next."

Mutable is not bad, buddy. You live in mutable world.

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#74

Post by remus »

nikitaga wrote: post #56
Klonoar wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...but there's nothing to "fix", it works as intended. You might want to do things differently nowadays, is all - that's not on Moment. Re: "obsolete"... jQuery is somewhere laughing, having gone through this already.

> ...but there's nothing to "fix", it works as intended If there were nothing to fix, they wouldn't be telling people not to start new projects with Moment. They actually do mention a few significant issues that they can't / won't fix in Moment such as bundle size and mutability. I will concede that perhaps Moment was "done" at some point before, some years back. When it was quite complete, yet was still the best way…

I think it's worth making the distinction between "nothing to fix" and "nothing to fix in moment.js". Clearly the problem they're trying to solve is still a real one, and there ARE problems with moment, but the cost of breaking backwards compatibility in moment to fix those problems isn't worth it because the new API would be so dissimilar to the current API it would only confuse users.

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#76

Post by theon144 »

glintik wrote: post #73
dmit wrote: post #52

Please pardon this drive-by assessment of JS calendar libraries by a casual user. moment.js: Mutable. Thank you, next. Luxon: Takes the effort to implement `Interval`, which would be `Range ` in any proper language, but somehow avoids providing separate `Date` and `Time` objects. Day.js: When you kinda like moment.js, but your bundler says it's too fat. date-fns: The finest of pure, curry-able functions over the mine…

"moment.js: Mutable. Thank you, next." Mutable is not bad, buddy. You live in mutable world.

Mutable is not bad when necessary, but otherwise I'd say that immutable is generally quite good.

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#78

Post by vorticalbox »

vasachi wrote: post #6
SenHeng wrote: post #2

> We now generally consider Moment to be a legacy project in maintenance mode. It is not dead, but it is indeed done.

Honestly, I wish more js libraries would be that way. I’ve used date-fns in a small part of an app, so of course when I return to it in several months, date-fns released a fully incompatible new major version.

sure, annoying but they did bump to v2, nothing is stopping you from continuing to use the older version if it works for you.

Re: We now consider Moment.js to be a legacy project in maintenance mode

#79

Post by ShorsHammer »

bartread wrote: post #67
jasonkester wrote: post #5

Good for them. Open Source seems to have an irrational fear of done . Done is good. Done should be the goal. But it’s not. Because if you’re not adding new features and pushing code changes every day, your project is abandoned , dead . To quote another thread from two minutes ago: “I’m quite sad to see the end of Moment.js” I wish the was a way to fix this attitude. So that project maintainers didn’t need to write tw…

> I wish the was a way to fix this attitude. So that project maintainers didn’t need to write two page apologies for finishing their thing. One of the problems is that GitHub is full of OSS libraries where the last commit was three years or more ago and you have no idea (without forensically analysing commits, issues, etc.) whether it's because the project is done or because the maintainer(s) lost interest, had other…

Does clearly-stated and overt semantic versioning not solve this?
Post reply on HN