
Io.js 2.0.0 Released - feross
https://iojs.org/en/index.html?2.0.0
======
mmcclure
Just like all statistics, these should be taken with a grain of salt, but I
think Github's "pulse" breakdowns between Iojs and Node are pretty sobering.

Iojs: 49 authors have pushed 168 commits to master and 572 commits to all
branches. On master, 8,474 files have changed and there have been 1,524,012
additions and 708,276 deletions.

Node: 30 authors have pushed 5 commits to master and 95 commits to all
branches. On master, 10 files have changed and there have been 294 additions
and 36 deletions.

That's for the last month.

~~~
NhanH
Did I read the number wrong, or is that an absurd amount of changes (note: I
haven't look at the commit myself, as I have no idea how to get all the stats
from github interface)?

That's about 800000 additional lines of code for 49 developers in a months, or
~16000 LOC for each developer. Unless additions and deletions are counted on a
different unit, can anyone knowledgeable explain to me how the numbers are
reasonable at all?

~~~
brandonb927
Joyent used to have the license on the top of virtually EVERY file in the repo
for node. Someone removed all but one (6430 deletions)
[https://github.com/iojs/io.js/pull/311/files](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/pull/311/files)

I can imagine this makes up for a portion of it.

~~~
k__
If Joyent has the copyright, why could they remove these notes?

Or is this just a cosmetic thing and they removed it from the files but kept
it in a separate license file?

~~~
forthefuture
The commit message:

"The copyright and license notice is already in the LICENSE file. There is no
justifiable reason to also require that it be included in every file, since
the individual files are not individually distributed except as part of the
entire package."

------
BinaryIdiot
Now we just need io.js to merge with node. I feel like I can't use io.js for
anything beyond experimentation until the inevitable happens.

Edit: Damn that was quickly downvoted. It seems the HN community is more
behind io.js than it was a few months ago. I still think node and io.js using
the same package manager is simply untenable so I'm just waiting for something
to give before I decide to use io.js beyond experimentation.

~~~
kybernetikos
> I still think node and io.js using the same package manager is simply
> untenable

There are a whole bunch of packages in npm that are targeted at environments
other than node (e.g. the browser).

For me the big difference is not between node/io.js for which a simple setting
in your packages.json would be enough to sort out, but rather between es6
style modules and node style modules. I'd probably rather have a separate
repository for es6 style modules.

~~~
BinaryIdiot
> For me the big difference is not between node/io.js for which a simple
> setting in your packages.json would be enough to sort out, but rather
> between es6 style modules and node style modules.

Setting the engine will separate things but this also means your package is
now _only_ available for that engine. npm doesn't give you a way to submit the
same module multiple times to target different engines. So setting this limits
the amount of environments your module. Maybe that's okay but the great thing
about node + npm has been the ability to install and use any module you find;
separating things would mean you'll come across modules you need and you might
not be able to use. This kills the experience in my opinion.

> I'd probably rather have a separate repository for es6 style modules.

Why would you want one repository for ECMAScript 5 modules and one for
ECMAScript 6? The end goal is to move everything towards ECMAScript 6 so would
you want this to merge back into regular npm after a certain amount of time?
Creating a different repository for modules that use language improvements
seems like a bad idea to me. It's a good way to segregate modules from one
another.

~~~
kybernetikos
> Creating a different repository for modules that use language improvements
> seems like a bad idea to me.

It's not just the language improvements in general, I'm thinking of the es6
module spec in particular. I've experimented with es6 modules that 6to5 post
install or things like that, but the way es6 modules interact with npm is a
bit kludgy at the moment. I'd like something that made es6 modules feel
native, natural and the default.

------
reimertz
"process.nextTick() performance has been improved by between 2-42% across the
benchmark suite, notable because this is heavily used across core (Brian
White)"

That is pretty amazing.

------
markthethomas
Congrats to the io.js team! I know there's lots going on in the node vs. io.js
world/debate/comparison/everything, but regardless it's so great to see a team
working on an OSS project so well.

------
jpalomaki
Ryan Dahl in 2011 interview: "Hopefully in the next 6 months we'll release a
1.0 version of Node. The idea is to constrain what goes into "core" and not
allow it to grow too big - so there will not be endless stream of feature
additions. 1.0 will look pretty much like Node does now"
[http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2011/01/31/node-js-
interview-4...](http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2011/01/31/node-js-
interview-4-questions-with-creator-ryan-dahl/)

------
dheera
Confusing name. I just spent a while trying to figure out _what_ this thing
is. It should be hereafter forbidden to name anything ".js" unless it actually
is a library written IN JavaScript and designed to be used within JavaScript
code.

~~~
Ravengenocide
> io.js is an npm compatible platform originally based on Node.js™. Doesn't
> that explain it pretty well?

~~~
dheera
The first time I read this sentence, I thought it was some kind of I/O library
for users of Node. I thought "npm-compatible platform" meant "this is some
kind of library that can be installed/added to your project by using npm".

------
hitekker
I was at a conference recently and had the privilege of mikeal (@mikeal)
explain the differences between io.js and node.js, as well as the future that
he and the io.js team saw for node as a whole.

All that he articulated at the conference is pretty much what you see on
iojs.org. What struck me in particular was how reasonable and level-headed he
was about the entire controversy. While it would be very easy to castigate
Joyent for their incompetence, mikeal was positive throughout the whole
presentation, without having that positivity detract from the mission of io.js
(i.e. he said things that were nice, but not empty or hollow.)

His fellow, emilyrose (also on github), also seemed like a fairly intelligent
person.

From that short encounter alone, I would say IO.JS appears have quite to have
a healthy community. Here's hoping they can take Node off of Joyent's hands,
and merge IO.JS into it.

------
secoif
The V8 4.2 update adds support for Native Classes in JavaScript:
[https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/1393](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/1393)

Significant & controversial.

------
TheAceOfHearts
Very exciting! It's great to see ES6 slowly rolling out as well. I've been
using it with babeljs and it's been a blast.

------
smegel
If there wasn't a new cool kid on the block every month making last month's
cool kid look like a douche, it just wouldn't be JavaScript.

------
randallma
Changelog:
[https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/7c89c4c7acdaa2035ec42195a...](https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/7c89c4c7acdaa2035ec42195ade689419209c2fd/CHANGELOG.md)

------
brianorwhatever
Should I be ditching node for io?

~~~
k__
There seem to be a few people who like to merge node and IO, but I have the
impression most of the community doesn't want to merge.

I think node will go down in favor of IO, because they can't keep up.

~~~
tracker1
I think it's still entirely possible for Node's new org to pretty much adopt
iojs's technical committee nearly as-is. There's still no version conflicts.
There's a minor support niggle for some internationalization bits in node
0.12's core, but beyond that, there's still a chance.

My only thought is that when io.js/node reaches a point for an LTS release,
that they do a major bump for the LTS, and another for the ongoing dev... so
that #.x.x is LTS. instead of ~#.#.x

------
mcardleliam
Every time I wake up it seems like there is a new version of iojs.

~~~
nodejsisbest
That's why I always say that Node.js is the best server side JS framework.
Pretty stable in terms of never getting updates quickly / etc.

~~~
pmontra
And is that a good thing?

You are not forced to update (in another environment, I have customers with
Rails apps in production of version 2.3, 3.0, 3.2, 4.0, 4.2) but you have the
option to develop with the latest technology. In those Rails examples: I'll
start new projects with Rails 4.2 and Ruby 2.2.2 and not with what I had two
years ago. In the JS world, I'd start with ES6 and the latest v8, not the old
one from node.

------
alexggordon
I know I'm coming to this a little late, but I'd be really interested in
knowing what the Node creators think is happening with node currently. The
current top comment here[0] cites an active community with iojs, and a not so
active community with node . However, I can't imagine that the node creators
would say that node is stagnant or perfect, so before we start comparing node
to IE, has anyone done any kind of reconciliation with the node devs?

I understand why iojs forked, but I really hate to see communities get
abandoned or go stagnant like this.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9490843#9490962](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9490843#9490962)

~~~
jorangreef
As far as I understand, the majority of Node core contributors thought it
necessary to move Node.js to io.js, and are now active there. io.js is
basically the new Node.js, barring the name. It's less a fork, and more a
rename, to get control back from Joyent who could have threatened some of the
core team over the trademark.

------
EazyC
Man, if there was ever a cool domain name to use the .io TLD it'd be
iojs...WHY ARE THEY .ORG!!

~~~
algorithms
Well .org is pretty much the standard TLD for open source projects. While it
would be "cool" to use .io it might confuse some people.

It's very common for example that projects have an .org for their Open Source
software and .com or other for their business behind it (see wordpress.org vs
wordpress.com)

~~~
EazyC
Ya, makes sense. What about all the trendy open source stuff that have the TLD
.io as their suffix like socket.io etc? How did the .io trend start anyway?

------
mrinterweb
Just in case anyone is concerned, as I was, you can reach this site at
[https://iojs.io/en/index.html](https://iojs.io/en/index.html) :)

