We have a new maintainer. 馃憦馃徏 #115

merged 2 commits into from Oct 31, 2016


None yet

2 participants


No description provided.

aichholzer added some commits Oct 31, 2016
@aichholzer aichholzer We have a new maintainer.
@aichholzer aichholzer Version bump.
@aichholzer aichholzer merged commit a469e01 into master Oct 31, 2016

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
@aichholzer aichholzer deleted the fix/readme branch Oct 31, 2016
donpark commented Oct 31, 2016

Nice and concise. Allow me to answer your email question here as this is the proper channel.

Migration to ES6, I am OK with that. I used CoffeeScript because I was comfortable with it. If you find ES6 more comfortable, go with that if you are confident it won't break backward-compatibility.

First goal should be to respect backward-compatibility to prevent existing tools that depend on it, including its idiosyncrasies, from breaking. When that goal conflicts with what you want to do, I'd like to suggest forking with name change, like html2jade2 or html2pug in your own repo with forwarding links in this repo's README. Everyone is happy this way.

IMO Semver in-practice promotes backward-incompatibility because it allows multitude of conflicting versions under one name.


I think the ES6 "upgrade" will make a lot of improvements possible (some of which I have seen in the issues), so I will move forward with it. Keeping things backwards compatible must, of course, and will be the main constraint for any new releases.

I agree with your comment about semver, but, as long as the core remains compatible with the past then it should not matter. If at any point, there is a conflict, I will consider forking and redirecting to, indeed, keep everyone happy.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment