You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I heard that node.js was a trademark but not node itself so perhaps a more appropriate name could be chosen. io.js is kind of lame, everybody knows node. Make it node foundation, node.org or something. :)
@Rush tell it to Joyent, we don't have any control over them putting it in a foundation and we can't call it anything with "node" in it or Joyent says they'll come after us for trademark violation.
@mikeal Is there any place where we could read some info on who is behind the fork, what is the position of Joyent and npm, Inc. regarding it, what is the plan about compatibility with Joyent's Node.js and npm modules and the registry, whether it is a fork of https://github.com/joyent/node or https://github.com/node-forward/node and any other useful information on what the fork can mean to the community?
The discussion on Hacker News is mostly just speculation, the website https://github.com/iojs/iojs.github.io is an empty repo, the iojs organization has no public members, and all of the secrecy results in lots of rumors and speculation.
Is there any public discussion that is taking place? When can we expect any official answers to the question that people are asking about the fork? Thanks.
Expect more information this week, there's a few complicated background events that need to happen before there can be full information flow but rest assured that the goal of everyone involved here is to achieve complete openness. Patience please.
Libav is a friendly and community-driven effort to provide its users with a set of portable, functional and high-performance libraries for dealing with multimedia formats of all sorts. It originates from the FFmpeg codebase, but goes its own way these days, providing its users with reliable releases and a clear vision how to go forward.
@mikeal Do you think it is a good idea to put the 0.12 branch with the updated readme as the default one? It's still a bit confusing that you get to the repo and you don't see the messaging in the master branch.
@mikeal -- Why not take the npm, Inc. tact to avoid trademark concerns. "node-forward" could have changed its name to "nf" and claimed it meant "not-forking". npm is disingenuous in their claim that npm doesn't mean "node package manager", and yet they get away with it without trademark worries. Makes me wonder why the "nf" team couldn't have the same success: "nf does not mean Node Forward, but is a backronym for 'not forking', we are taking node foward into the future." Then your github page could say, "nf(1) - node forward" just like NPM does when they're talking out of the other side of their mouths: https://github.com/npm/npm#npm1----node-package-manager (oops, I guess it does officially mean "node package manager", someone contact Joyent to initiate trademark agressions)
@derekm
Calling npm "disingenuous" seems a tad harsh. Our point when saying that "npm" isn't an acronym isn't that we're trying to disclaim our Node heritage or get around trademark issues, it's that npm has a broader audience now that it's used so heavily in client-side development, and we're reflecting that changed audience in how we think about and discuss the project / product / company. Case in point: your link into the readme no longer works, because we've changed the synopsis from "Node" to "JavaScript" as soon as we noticed that it still said Node.
The reasoning behind the io.js name and why the fork happened now and not some other time is discussed in greater detail elsewhere, so I'm not too worried about the legalistic implications of what you wrote, but I did want to be clear that we're not trying to put one over on everybody. npm is the package manager for Node, but it's more than that as well.
Activity
Rush commentedon Nov 30, 2014
I heard that
node.jswas a trademark but notnodeitself so perhaps a more appropriate name could be chosen.io.jsis kind of lame, everybody knowsnode. Make itnode foundation,node.orgor something. :)mikeal commentedon Nov 30, 2014
@Rush tell it to Joyent, we don't have any control over them putting it in a foundation and we can't call it anything with "node" in it or Joyent says they'll come after us for trademark violation.
rsp commentedon Nov 30, 2014
@mikeal Is there any place where we could read some info on who is behind the fork, what is the position of Joyent and npm, Inc. regarding it, what is the plan about compatibility with Joyent's Node.js and npm modules and the registry, whether it is a fork of https://github.com/joyent/node or https://github.com/node-forward/node and any other useful information on what the fork can mean to the community?
I've found https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/master/doc/tc-meetings/2014-10-09.md but the issue https://github.com/node-forward/node/issues/2 that is referenced there is a dead link and the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNW_tu2QnpA was made private so most of the context is missing.
The discussion on Hacker News is mostly just speculation, the website https://github.com/iojs/iojs.github.io is an empty repo, the iojs organization has no public members, and all of the secrecy results in lots of rumors and speculation.
Is there any public discussion that is taking place? When can we expect any official answers to the question that people are asking about the fork? Thanks.
rvagg commentedon Nov 30, 2014
Expect more information this week, there's a few complicated background events that need to happen before there can be full information flow but rest assured that the goal of everyone involved here is to achieve complete openness. Patience please.
rsp commentedon Nov 30, 2014
@rvagg OK, I'll keep waiting. Thanks for the info.
devongovett commentedon Nov 30, 2014
Sorry guys, I may have tweeted this kinda early https://twitter.com/devongovett/status/538131893682569216 (HN post came after that tweet). Apologies if I messed up your launch plans. 😄
liveinjs commentedon Dec 2, 2014
what ? what,,,,What happened ?
mikeal commentedon Dec 2, 2014
hopefully this makes it less confusing #24
alexgorbatchev commentedon Dec 3, 2014
https://libav.org/about.html, a fork of ffmpeg has a good intro
evanx commentedon Dec 4, 2014
Somebody set up us the bomb
sorribas commentedon Dec 5, 2014
@mikeal Do you think it is a good idea to put the 0.12 branch with the updated readme as the default one? It's still a bit confusing that you get to the repo and you don't see the messaging in the master branch.
derekm commentedon Dec 10, 2014
@mikeal -- Why not take the npm, Inc. tact to avoid trademark concerns. "node-forward" could have changed its name to "nf" and claimed it meant "not-forking". npm is disingenuous in their claim that npm doesn't mean "node package manager", and yet they get away with it without trademark worries. Makes me wonder why the "nf" team couldn't have the same success: "nf does not mean Node Forward, but is a backronym for 'not forking', we are taking node foward into the future." Then your github page could say, "nf(1) - node forward" just like NPM does when they're talking out of the other side of their mouths: https://github.com/npm/npm#npm1----node-package-manager (oops, I guess it does officially mean "node package manager", someone contact Joyent to initiate trademark agressions)
othiym23 commentedon Dec 24, 2014
@derekm
Calling npm "disingenuous" seems a tad harsh. Our point when saying that "npm" isn't an acronym isn't that we're trying to disclaim our Node heritage or get around trademark issues, it's that npm has a broader audience now that it's used so heavily in client-side development, and we're reflecting that changed audience in how we think about and discuss the project / product / company. Case in point: your link into the readme no longer works, because we've changed the synopsis from "Node" to "JavaScript" as soon as we noticed that it still said Node.
The reasoning behind the io.js name and why the fork happened now and not some other time is discussed in greater detail elsewhere, so I'm not too worried about the legalistic implications of what you wrote, but I did want to be clear that we're not trying to put one over on everybody. npm is the package manager for Node, but it's more than that as well.
cjihrig commentedon Jan 8, 2015
Can this be closed? I think the relationship with Node.js has been pretty well established by now.
bnoordhuis commentedon Jan 8, 2015
Yes, I do believe so. I'll close the issue.
Thread and shutdown safety for NodeTraceWriter (nodejs#3)
Thread and shutdown safety for NodeTraceWriter (#3)
Thread and shutdown safety for NodeTraceWriter (nodejs#3)
test: allow tests to pass without internet
test: allow tests to pass without internet
test: allow tests to pass without internet
test: allow tests to pass without internet
http: remove adapter frame from onParserExecute
http: remove adapter frame from onParserExecute
http: remove adapter frame from onParserExecute
http: remove adapter frame from onParserExecute
http: remove adapter frame from onParserExecute
http: remove adapter frame from onParserExecute
V8 platform-posix.cc: OS::HasLazyCommits() patch
Merge pull request #3 from tonidy/claude/fix-cpu-zero-error-01KrY24Y7…
src: fix edge case when deflateInit2() fails with Z_VERSION_ERROR
src: fix edge case when deflateInit2() fails with Z_VERSION_ERROR
src: fix edge case when deflateInit2() fails with Z_VERSION_ERROR
painpoints: add nodejs#8 — extern struct layout is an unverified clai…
src: fix edge case when deflateInit2() fails with Z_VERSION_ERROR