-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 212
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
Merge ZeroMQ-NG back into ZeroMQ.js #343
Conversation
Just to be clear on this: the AppVeyor check is failing because there is no need for AppVeyor anymore. Travis will also test & build from source on Windows x64 & x86. |
Ok great, we can just turn AppVeyor off for now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need the project to be able to move forward with this API, so I'm in favor of this plan. Thank you @rolftimmermans.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rolftimmermans This is great! Thanks you so much for moving things forward.
The feedback in #189 was very positive and I am very much in favour of this plan. Especially the compatibility layer should make upgrading quite easy.
Before we move forward and merge this PR, I have two questions:
|
I have made a separate issue to track all activities (and added a few new ones, especially for after this PR lands). Right now I'm blocked by my two questions in my previous comment; would be great to get some feedback! |
@reqshark @ronkorving @kkoopa might have some thoughts. I don't know what their bandwidth is these days. I'm leaning towards helping you take on more of the reins @rolftimmermans and driving this forward. It works well and is the direction we need to take for future node versions. |
I think this is great. |
Agreed, this is awesome! :) (not a lot of bandwidth, but FWIW I love the API) |
I would love to push this forward further, with input from everyone that is able to provide it. In the short term I'm mostly blocked by not being able to add the integration users in Github & NPM to automatically build & release a beta to get some feedback from users. |
@bluca or @somdoron -- do you know how to facilitate the above request? |
If you need me to set a key, send it encrypted with gpg to bluca@debian.org and I'll set it |
I can give the new user a write permission on the repo if needed |
That would be excellent. If |
@rolftimmermans Sorry for the delay. I added the integration user to the GitHub zeromq.js team and to the If Travis is tricky to get setup with the correct secrets, we can also try GitHub actions which is a bit easier when it comes to secrets. |
@lgeiger Perfect! I have added the encrypted keys and will wait for Travis to pass before merging. Github actions does seem like an interesting alternative for the future. But with the API keys in place I think Travis should be enough for now to automate the build & release process. |
Cool 👍 |
Wahoo!!! |
@lgeiger @rolftimmermans did you release a version to npm? I want to use the new async API |
Yep! Try |
thanks! |
This is a continuation of #189.
This is the status of my rewrite, ZeroMQ-NG, which I'd like to get merged back into ZeroMQ.js:
async
/await
and async iterators, and using the binary stable N-API to integrate with Node.js.Based on #189 (comment), the following needs to be done.
Edit: I have added a more complete list in #347, so that we can also track activities after the PR.
Regarding the version tags mentioned above, this PR tags the next version as 6.0.0-beta.1.
I'd like to invite everyone to browse, review, test and comment! You can browse the code in this pull request at
https://github.com/rolftimmermans/zeromq.js/tree/upstream
. If you wish to use the prebuilt binaries, it is available from NPM aszeromq-ng@5.0.0-beta.26
.