Skip to content
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

Tidelift #161

Open
shadowspawn opened this issue Jan 16, 2025 · 6 comments
Open

Tidelift #161

shadowspawn opened this issue Jan 16, 2025 · 6 comments

Comments

@shadowspawn
Copy link
Collaborator

shadowspawn commented Jan 16, 2025

I was wondering whether to do more work here as fairly quiet and question whether should be archived (#149 (comment)), but a surprising number of downloads (perhaps due to early use by some popular packages like jackspeak) so looks worthwhile for now.

And there is even some Tidelift income available.

Is it ok if I do some maintenance and apply to lift package?

@ljharb ljharb changed the title TideLift Tidelift Jan 16, 2025
@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented Jan 16, 2025

If we can bring the package in line with node's native support, but supporting much older node versions, then I think that's very worth it, and I'd love to join you in that effort.

@shadowspawn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

but supporting much older node versions

pargsArgs currently requires minimum Node 14 brought into range by #135

Do you mean continuing support for Node 14, or thinking of going further back? (Are you hoping to use it somewhere, like say tape?)

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented Feb 2, 2025

Further back - the main benefit of being a package is using it in older nodes, and the older it goes the more projects can use it.

@shadowspawn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Old node versions is not a passion of mine, but might be simpler and half the code if we drop the pseudo node internal primordials. I had a light look through index.js and noticed Object.entries (node 7) and ?? (node 14) to refactor.

You did say "in line with node's native support" and may or may not have had primordials in scope.

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented Feb 9, 2025

I would like to maintain that robustness, yes, although we don’t need to match node’s primordials style.

@shadowspawn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shadowspawn commented Feb 15, 2025

I am interested in maintaining parseArgs, but not hardening and back porting. My basic maintenance offer still stands.

The current primordials support was primarily for source compatibility with Node.js and does not provide same runtime protection:

You did consider at the time making it more robust at runtime, but that hasn't happened (and to be clear, no slight intended, I don't think hardening is required to having an API compatible implementation of parseArgs).

On a related note and for possible use in future projects targeting Node.js inclusion, a node-primoridals has since been published (requiring Node 14):

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants