-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Drop NodeJs 6 support & Require NodeJs >= 8.6 #3508
Comments
IMHO, current Hexo v4 loadmap has many tasks. PS. I think, this issue's priority is higher than the other Hexo v4 loadmap's tasks. |
@NoahDragon |
I believe we should proceed with the removal of node 6 I'm just worried about hexo itself, as we were planning lots of new stuff for version 4, |
@tomap Personally I wouldn't mind if minor version bump instead (i.e. v3.9.0). I know it's not a good versioning practice and it would break Node 6 users with hexo Alternatively, bump to v4, change roadmap to v5. It's not too bad if communicated clearly (on the needs to drop node 6) on #2492 and blog post. I feel dropping Node 6 by itself is already major enough, it not only allow hexo to use more updated deps, but also use new js features. Both of my PRs (hexojs/hexo-generator-sitemap#46 #3538) require Node >=8.6 simply because of the use of Object spread operator. |
I do not have a clear preference.... |
If there are only two buttons, I would press on "minor version". Dropping node in a minor version is not that bad; nunjucks added node version requirement (from |
IMHO this idea is better than minor version up. But, I think the biggest issue is "who decides this matter?". |
It is becoming a matter of security. I would go with the solution of @yoshinorin => bump to v4 = end of nodejs 6 |
v4 -> v5 seem safer. On node requirement, I would like to suggest |
OK... Conclusion
TBD
Others@hexojs/core Do you have any suggestion? |
If you guys want to drop NodeJS 6 support, then #3328 should be considered. |
Thanks @SukkaW :) Dear all |
I think it's fine to drop node v6. I can see that some people want to make contributions but the unit tests can sometimes fail because es6 features. I might ask that we consider completing hexo v4 roadmap tasks, if they still make sense, for hexo v4 and not push them to hexo v5. I will try to help too. Thanks for everyone who added to the discussion! 🤗 |
I created v4.0.0 loadmap & changed #2492 issue title. |
@yoshinorin |
@weyusi |
I think most of the essential plugins have already dropped node 6 by now, just not yet npm-published. So, hexo v4 is more or less ready, unless there are some pending issues. If there is any pending issue, the following are the ones I can think of:
In relation to https://github.com/orgs/hexojs/teams/core/discussions/5, I think plugins should be released right after hexo@4, meaning hexo should be the first to introduce breaking change. |
Basically, I agree @curbengh But, IMHO we should publish these plugins before release hexo v4. |
I see what you mean. Those plugins, in addition to these plugins (of hexo-starter) should be published before hexo@4. Other non-essential plugins can be released before or after hexo@4. |
Since hexo-util@1 and hexo-renderer-marked@2 have been released, we're almost ready for Hexo 4. PRs I think should be included in v4:
|
* docs: installation guide nodejs version hexojs/hexo#3508 * docs: nodejs in zh-tw * docs: update installation guide * docs(install): recommends higher nodejs version
* chore: drop Node 6 hexojs#3508
This year, at the end of April, nodejs 6 will be 'End of Life'
We are starting to see project dropping support for nodejs 6. and as a consequence, we will need to drop that support also if we want to update our dependencies.
See hexojs/hexo-server#85 as a first example
We should decide if we are ok with doing so, because once we start, we'll have to update in cascade most projects
We should also plan to communicate (blog post) on this
Maybe that could also be a trigger for Hexo v4 #2492
What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: