Brian LeRoux 💚Lots to unpack here. Modern JS going just great.
This situation is avoidable
https://dev.to/thejaredwilcurt/bun-hype-how-we-learned-nothing-from-yarn-2n3j
Francis 🏴☠️ Gulotta@brianleroux I really liked the fork of io.js what we got in the end was so much better node v4 was way beyond 0.12 the previous release. I’m also not convinced and npm would’ve gotten as good as it did without yarn. The tribalism and the incompatibilities are troubling. But the years it took npm to catch up are probably why yarn never shut down. Deno on the other hand has made node better, but I’m not tapped into its trajectory. It’s absolutely not like io.js.
Bun seems like a toy tbh
@reconbot diversity good overall. Treating open source as a competition instead of a scientific collaboration probably my biggest gripe. That and lying about performance and tradeoffs. React community has been particularly misleading and bad faith actors on this regard and Bun learned a lot from that.
your idiot friend@brianleroux @reconbot io.js worked because it was a true oss fork.
My deep concern is these new projects are pointing to examples like io.js as why we should trust them, but we’re seeing private companies with VC funding being spun up behind them. The pressures VC funding produces is a worrying new element that makes some of the lock in aspects of bun more concerning than they otherwise would be. If there’s money to be had, why isn’t it funding existing oss rather than greenfield projects?
@brianleroux @reconbot these don’t feel like OSS projects anymore they feel like loss-leaders. I’m open to there being new funding models rather than “passion project turned contracting opportunities” or “large blue chip patron”. But “sell the service give away the software” starts to feel gross when there already exists an underfunded truly open project that is more than just a direct competitor.
@dcousineau @reconbot biggest irony being io.js was a fork of the venture backed private company joyent owned codebase known at that time as 'node'.
@brianleroux @dcousineau That’s kind of wonderful tbh
@brianleroux @dcousineau I agree, I just spent a good chunk of time looking at a venture backed terraform/k8s competitor (tbh not sure which they want to compete with) and like I can’t identify why it’s basically not closed source, other than you get better bug reports when the source is open. - which is sort of what hashicorp is doing
@reconbot @dcousineau oh man, that whole debacle made me extra happy we decided to go all in on cloudformation. someday, when azure catches up, a port to bicep is in my future.
@brianleroux @dcousineau CDK has been my goto for novel infra setups, it's far from perfect but the best abstraction I've played with for complicated things.
@reconbot @dcousineau yeah. idk. between the version 1 - 2 upgrade, typescript breaking in minors, and just the whole idea of executing transpiled js to generate a cloudformation document…none of that speaks to reliability to me which is exactly what i want from IaC. To each their own of course. I think Architect does a lot right for most use cases to make CFN more palpable but ack its not comprehensive.
@brianleroux @dcousineau All true! and technically you can eject but def cloudformation is the winner here
@reconbot @dcousineau yeah that eject is a major 🔑 … same for Architect apps!
@brianleroux @dcousineau You know I know it