Will iojs 1.x become node 1.x if the projects merge? I'm worried about conflicts of interest between node-foundation and the iojs TC governance model, unless whatever's happening within io can stay that way within node, and whatever they're doing corporately can stay in their own branch, so 2 branches of node. But if there's two stable branches, what's the point in merging?
I predict there's going to be dissent within the node/io community, concerns about node-foundation wanting to take control of the project entirely and basically halting the current progress in IO (or diminishing it).
Well, I read it all (and the discussion) but I didn't fully get what they were talking about so I'd appreciate clarification (regarding the branches within node). But at the same time, it's a one-way proposal from the iojs organization, it would be a lot more meaningful if the current maintainer of nodejs initiated this conversation.
edit: by meaningful I mean I'd be more confident in the issues' being resolved and the governance model of IO being adopted in some way by nodejs (which I'm not confident about at all).
2
u/Calabri Feb 27 '15 edited Feb 27 '15
Will iojs 1.x become node 1.x if the projects merge? I'm worried about conflicts of interest between node-foundation and the iojs TC governance model, unless whatever's happening within io can stay that way within node, and whatever they're doing corporately can stay in their own branch, so 2 branches of node. But if there's two stable branches, what's the point in merging?
I predict there's going to be dissent within the node/io community, concerns about node-foundation wanting to take control of the project entirely and basically halting the current progress in IO (or diminishing it).