search

haxetink / tink_io

Asynchronous I/O everywhere
https://haxetink.github.io/tink_io
MIT License
18 stars 12 forks source link

Consider merging pure branch and start proper documentations #29

Closed kevinresol closed 6 years ago

kevinresol commented 6 years ago

From time to time people come and ask what pure is, because we usually recommend people to use it. Mostly because we have all new features & bug fixes on pure branch only now. I suppose we should merge pure and properly document what targets are supported. From my understanding they should include node and php (and sys with runloop?).

Any objections? @back2dos @ciscoheat @gene-pavlovsky @benmerckx

back2dos commented 6 years ago

Yeah, I was a bit reluctant to merge, because it'll most likely break java, cs and quite possibly neko. But I think we should move ahead now and fix problems when people start complaining.

gene-pavlovsky commented 6 years ago

Personal opinion: Don't be afraid to break stuff. If you're too conservative, progress will be too slow. Let people complain when things break, or better yet, they might submit PRs to fix the broken parts.

kevinresol commented 6 years ago

It is nighttime here, and I will do the following in the next morning:

  1. rename master as old
  2. rename pure as master
  3. force push the new master

I think this is the best way to preserve the history

gene-pavlovsky commented 6 years ago

Is this a good practice? Why not just merge to master?

benmerckx commented 6 years ago

You could use a git merge strategy as outlined here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/2763118/5872160

kevinresol commented 6 years ago

I know that, but we don't really want a "merge", but complete replacement.

e.g. we don't want old code, which is not part of pure, to stay. For instance the Buffer class in master is completely gone in pure. If we "merge", it will stay.

kevinresol commented 6 years ago

Ok, after a shower my mind is back. Maybe it works, because merging should also bring in the "delete Buffer class" commit for example.

kevinresol commented 6 years ago

https://github.com/haxetink/tink_io/pull/32 https://github.com/haxetink/tink_web/pull/65 https://github.com/haxetink/tink_http/pull/99 https://github.com/haxetink/tink_cli/pull/11 https://github.com/benmerckx/asys/pull/6

anything else?

gene-pavlovsky commented 6 years ago

These have failing CI checks: https://github.com/haxetink/tink_io/pull/32 https://github.com/haxetink/tink_cli/pull/11 https://github.com/benmerckx/asys/pull/6 Is that ok? :)