
Node.js and io.js are merging under the Node Foundation - onestone
https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/1664#issuecomment-101828384
======
frik

      The io.js TC agrees to:
    
      1. have the io.js project join the Node Foundation
      2. rename the entire “iojs” GitHub org to be “nodejs”
      3. invite the the current Node.js TC on to our TC to form 
         the basis of a Node Foundation TSC under the policies 
         of the Node Foundation
      4. moving the io.js Working Groups to be under the Node 
         Foundation
    

\-- [https://docs.google.com/document/d/15Y_kJlYm-8cIf-
alniaqUWMM...](https://docs.google.com/document/d/15Y_kJlYm-8cIf-alniaqUWMM-
TjGISCqLf40G3pv4sM/edit?pli=1)

~~~
barosl
In short, Node.js is discontinued, but io.js is renamed to Node.js? That
sounds reasonable.

I personally preferred the name of "iojs" to "node", but it's true that node's
brand is more powerful...

~~~
jballanc
It's EGCS all over again.

------
neduma
Great news. Like Rails + Merb merge. We should give awards for these
achievements. In our field, forking is easy - but merging is up hill battle.

Kudos to whoever made it happen.

~~~
stormbrew
Personally, I think the ruby world really lost something when merb folded into
Rails. It left the community split between the one giant framework and many
microframeworks, where merb was really something in between. Big enough for
real work, but small enough and with a small enough dose of 'magic' (where
rails has an absurd amount) that it was still pretty understandable.

Rails became more configurable because of it, but I don't really feel like it
ever got smaller or more understandable. That said, I've been out of that game
for quite a while, so maybe it eventually did.

But I also don't think it's really comparable because merb wasn't a fork of
rails like io.js was of node.js.

~~~
juliangregorian
I dunno, I've done a lot of Rails work and a bit of work with Padrino, and
Rails doesn't really seem a lot bigger, just better put together.

~~~
stormbrew
Padrino might be a good counter-example, because I think maybe it occupies a
similar niche as merb fell into (I can't say for sure, because I've only used
it very experimentally). But it took a long time from the merb-Rails merge to
Padrino existing (at least 2 years, I believe).

------
Xeoncross
I'm glad the community started looking into this option. Sometimes it's hard
to work together with people after all the success of finally being free from
them. Not that I wanted io.js to compromise, but it looks like it will be best
for everyone. Thanks for all the hard work from people like Mikeal Rogers who
worked on this when they could have been working on other things.

------
nailer
Great. Great for stable v8 in node, great for a node with all the new commits
in the io.js branch, great for trademarks now being owned by the community.

Mikeal has more details here:
[https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/1664#issuecomment-10054...](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/1664#issuecomment-100545638)

Also great for jsdom (one of node's best features) soon running on node again!

------
DigitalSea
This is a massive weight off of my shoulders, I can imagine it is for Joyent
and IO contributors alike as well. While the fragmentation fortunately didn't
get to the point where the two projects were disjointed, I knew the day would
eventually come when IO was so far ahead issues with compatibility between
Node and IO start arising. I am glad both parties and everyone involved
approached this situation with an open mind and as a result of carefully
planned out and a fair democratic decision was reached.

Now we might finally see promises land in Node.js (finally).

------
inglor
Here is a summary of the meeting
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/15Y_kJlYm-8cIf-
alniaqUWMM...](https://docs.google.com/document/d/15Y_kJlYm-8cIf-alniaqUWMM-
TjGISCqLf40G3pv4sM/edit)

------
graffitici
Brilliant news for the entire node ecosystem! Having two competing
implementations would not be ideal (even if they both support NPM). I hope
under this new structure, the development will work at the speed of io.js.
Well done to everyone involved!

~~~
regularfry
I disagree. Having more than one competing implementation following the same
standard would have been _awesome_. How likely it is that they would have
followed the same standard rather than each branching off incompatibly is
another question entirely...

~~~
stephen_g
The problem was that Node was based on a way older version of V8 with little
sign of being ready to move on in the near future, and io.js users had access
to all sorts of new features, so it was not a good thing for library authors -
either you use the new features, and nobody using Node can use your library
anymore, or you keep compatibility and have no advantage over just having
Node.

They weren't really different implementations anywa - io.js was based on Node
and most of the work they had done (as far as I know) was the move to the
newer V8 engine version. So they were the same thing, just partially
incompatible!

So it's really a great thing that they're merging, because it means that many
more people can start actually using the new stuff!

------
kevincennis
Maybe I missed it, but is there an estimate for when we'd see the first Node
release that has io.js changes merged in?

I know there's been a "convergence" repo for a while now, but I couldn't
quickly get a sense of how far along that process is.

~~~
shaneofalltrad
Don't be an excitement blocker, everyone wants to celebrate, then in the
morning we can try to understand what just happened.

But seriously, that is a good question. Maybe we can get an answer when node
.12 will be stable as well.

------
wesleytodd
Im glad, but honestly want the project to be called io.js. I liked the name
much better.

Note: this did come up in the TC meeting if anyone listened in. And they are
keeping the branding alive and will decide what to do with it in the future.

~~~
izolate
Exactly. For me, the Node.js name is tarnished. The community hit the ground
running with io.js and I believe it should have continued down that road. It
would have come to replace Node.js in due time.

~~~
aaron-lebo
I think you are an outlier, though. When you are talking about mass appeal, a
lot more people are aware of thee node name than io. There is no reason to
have to rebuild the branding and awareness process.

~~~
josteink
As anecdotal evidence: Where I work we _use_ Node in our projects and today is
the first time I've ever heard about io.js.

Make of that what you like.

~~~
izolate
You're not curious about your own tech stack?

~~~
josteink
When "everyone" says "Use node" and every problem you need solve is solvable
by googling "nodejs $problem" without anyone every anywhere mentioning iojs as
a viable option, you can still be curious about your own tech-stach without
knowing about the existence of forks.

I think you suffer from a too simplistic view of things.

------
anderspitman
I'm not deeply involved with the Node community, but on the surface this
sounds like really exciting news. From what I understand core development has
slowed down quite a bit with Node.js, and there were some issues with the
governance model, and io.js set out to solve these problems? It would be
awesome to get these benefits without having to split the community.

------
juanmnl
This is awesome! I think we have to thank Microsoft for their node fork. That
scared the hell out everyone, so they decided to get back together. :P

~~~
mdasen
Microsoft's fork is meant to be temporary, experimental fork.

"This GitHub fork enables Node.js to optionally use the Chakra JavaScript
engine on Windows 10, allowing Node.js to run on Windows on ARM. Our goal is
to merge back into master after stabilizing this code, fixing key gaps and
responding to early community feedback."

Their goal is to work on it, stabalize it, and then merge it back in once it's
ready for general use. Microsoft's "fork" wasn't trying to split the community
or create a permanent new path. It's to build something new for Node.js that
shouldn't be in the main project until it's ready. Microsoft wasn't trying to
split the community, but rather trying to take on an experimental project.

The io.js/Node.js situation wouldn't have been influenced by Microsoft's
announcement. Node.js/io.js didn't necessarily have an intention of reuniting
in the future and might have stayed apart. By contrast, Microsoft doesn't
intend to split off from Node.js at all.

~~~
juanmnl
Thanks for all the explanation. I though ending something with :P - could be
universally understood as a bit of irony. I'm just happy with the
announcement, and used MS fork and this announcement timing for my irony-
driven-comment. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. <3

~~~
jorgearturo
I'm aware publishing GIFs on HN is off-topic and I realize this might be a bit
childish but I couldn't help myself, and also, you sound like a lad with a
sense of humor so you might appreciate it :P

[http://imgur.com/gallery/BkXYbMj/](http://imgur.com/gallery/BkXYbMj/)

Whoever else might see this post, I'm sorry, this is just such great news I
had to celebrate somehow.

------
dikaiosune
I've been waiting for a while for server-side JS to seem a little less like
the wild west. One step closer to being willing to do more than play around
with it. Glad to see this.

------
joeblau
This is great news. It's so common for open source projects to fork, and
rarely do you see them join. I think this will be an overall win for both
communities.

------
Cshelton
This is _hopefully_ great news. The contribution pace needs to keep up though,
as it was with iojs.

------
slayerofbugs
Phew. I can finally stop explaining the difference between io.js and node.js
to recruiters!

~~~
feedjoelpie
Never explain anything to recruiters.

------
smegel
Sounds like a good outcome, for the software and community.

------
mangeletti
Does anyone recall the GitHub issue that turned into a days long thread of
animated gifs? I thought it was... happening again. And then I logged in to
find that the conversation was locked to collaborators.

~~~
showerst
That was a fix to PHP's composer system that drastically reduced memory usage.

~~~
bshimmin
I don't think that's really an excuse.

------
joshstrange
This is great news and makes me very happy. I wanted to switch us over to
io.js but dreaded a future in which npm package only work on one or the other
or maybe a npm and a iopm would exist. It's great to know that I don't need to
worry about moving over and that my imaginary future will never come to be.
Also glad both projects were able to reconcile their differences for the great
good of node's future.

------
vezzy-fnord
Such as with gcc and egcs under the FSF.

------
jongdubois
Really great news. I guess io.js fulfilled its purpose of shifting control of
Node.js away from Joyent and giving it the vitality it needs to remain a
leading backend technology.

------
shah_s
This is great news for the node community because a splinter would not have
worked for any one. Hopefully, we can leave this behind us and continue to
build great node apps.

------
iKenshu
This is amazing for Javascript!

------
aikah
By the way since tj Fontaine is out, who's going to replace him? and is it
related to iojs and nodejs merging?

~~~
M2Ys4U
There is no BDFL any more, so nobody will be replacing him.

There will be a Technical Steering Committee in charge instead.

------
ExpiredLink
BTW, what's the status 'Node programming'? After the initial hype it seemed to
have landed in the 'trough of disillusionment'. Are companies still creating
_new_ Node applications? Or just maintaining the old until they are replaced?
Will Node be a valuable skill in 2 years?

~~~
rwallace
I'm personally using it for a non-web project, but the most typical use case
for it is websites where some chunk of logic has to run on both client and
server; this is quite a common scenario and when it arises, Node is the only
game in town unless you want to write that code twice in two different
languages and then have to maintain the two versions in lockstep. (People have
started using the word 'isomorphic' to describe this scenario; one could argue
whether that's strictly accurate, but it's close enough to be suggestive at
least.)

------
samspot
I'm assuming many individuals swallowed their pride as part of this agreement.
Kudos to you all!

------
mandazi
As someone who is still learning Node.js and not familiar with io.js, what
does this mean exactly?

~~~
Killswitch
It means that you're going to get more updates. Nothing more, nothing less.
The biggest issue with Node under Joyent was the lack of updates.

------
fibo
A really nice story, a demonstration that open source is an evolution for
human kind

------
vectorpush
Wow, I'm surprised this actually happened. I haven't been watching
developments lately but it seemed like a pipe-dream when I first heard
rumblings of the idea. Congrats to everyone involved.

------
samartioli
The merge is great news. I also like the io name, but definitely agree that
Node.js should remain just based on awareness and for marketing. However.. has
anyone considered Node.io? :)

------
shin_lao
I'm really happy. This will greatly reduce the work for maintaining our nodejs
addon and also encourages us to continue investing in nodejs.

------
fiatjaf
Has anyone actually used Io.js for something?

~~~
mycelium
Yep, nw.js runs on io.js as of the 0.12 release in January.

Here's a giant list of people using it:
[https://github.com/nwjs/nw.js/wiki/List-of-apps-and-
companie...](https://github.com/nwjs/nw.js/wiki/List-of-apps-and-companies-
using-nw.js)

One of the more notable ones is Popcorn Time, the stupid easy to use movie
torrent client.

~~~
fiatjaf
Thank you.

------
chx
OK I am just an observer but what does this mean? End of io.js, codebase
merged back?

------
k__
Hopefully this doesn't mean io.js won't slow down again :\

------
mderazon
Anyone know what exactly Joyent got out of the deal?

------
AndyKelley
Next up: ffmpeg and libav

------
rajzshkr
Great News!!

------
EGreg
Yay!

------
bahador
great success!

------
cdnsteve
Lets see if we can break github record with animated gif comments on this one.
Let the good times roll!

------
eonw
are these people in highschool? get it together over there already!

~~~
wesleytodd
If you have been following the story much, they have handled this situation
with great care. Not like high schooler's at all.

~~~
eonw
well someone in the bunch ain't acting their age. IMHO. Otherwise they
wouldn't have created the situation in the first place. nah mean?

but thanks for the down votes. ;)

~~~
Gigablah
Do you even understand how the situation came about in the first place?

