Please stop.

[Mikeal Rogers]

We want to maintain an open community that allows discussion about a
variety of issues.

But, for practical reasons we have to acknowledge that the node list
needs to remain, mostly, about node.js and relate to the issues and
concerns of it's users.

Some quick and dirty math shows that of ~200 messages in the last 4
days, 53% of those messages relate to a discussion about an alternative
SSJS concurrency model that is not, and will not, be part of node.js.
One thread has served to dominate nearly half the mailing list traffic
with the majority of messages sent by only 4 "users" (in quotes because
they don't actually use node.js).

This is a good discussion, it should continue, a community should be
built around these ideas and a possible implementation, but out of
respect for the people on this list that really are using node and now
having a higher signal to noise ratio than they can possibly handle
please move that discussion to another forum.

I've created a Google Group for you
http://groups.google.com/group/javascript-coro , I'm happy to hand the
admin duties to someone else. Use it, or don't and use something else.

I have no ability to ban a discussion or set rules and codes of conduct,
nor would I want to establish a rule that excludes a particular set of
people or ideas. I'm just asking that out of respect for the people who
are doing real work with node.js and need to stay apprized of issues,
answer questions and ask them, please move this discussion and build a
community elsewhere.

-Mikeal

[Arnout Kazemier]

*applause* I agree, I getting rather annoyed with this off topic spam which is cluttering my inbox

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.
>

[Kilian C.]

+1

[Liam]

This list is gonna get a whole heckuva lot busier this year. Why not
just ignore threads you're not interested in? (Because your email
client doesn't do thread grouping is not a good reason. :-)

Some noders feel that the async syntax issue is a burning one. Ry &
Isaac are involved in that discussion. As long as it stays in a thread
or two, what's the big deal?

On Jan 20, 12:21 pm, Mikeal Rogers <mikeal.rog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We want to maintain an open community that allows discussion about a
> variety of issues.
>
> But, for practical reasons we have to acknowledge that the node list
> needs to remain, mostly, about node.js and relate to the issues and
> concerns of it's users.
>
> Some quick and dirty math shows that of ~200 messages in the last 4
> days, 53% of those messages relate to a discussion about an alternative
> SSJS concurrency model that is not, and will not, be part of node.js.
> One thread has served to dominate nearly half the mailing list traffic
> with the majority of messages sent by only 4 "users" (in quotes because
> they don't actually use node.js).
>
> This is a good discussion, it should continue, a community should be
> built around these ideas and a possible implementation, but out of
> respect for the people on this list that really are using node and now
> having a higher signal to noise ratio than they can possibly handle
> please move that discussion to another forum.
>

> I've created a Google Group for youhttp://groups.google.com/group/javascript-coro, I'm happy to hand the

[Mikeal Rogers]

What do you want to accomplish?

If you want to actually build something that you and other people can use,  you have enough people to start a community to build that.

As it stands you're just alienating a bunch of people who are trying to invest in node.js from even considering your future project.

This isn't about Ry and Isaacs, this is about the other ~3400 people on this list that signed up to learn and discuss node.js.

There is plenty of interest in alternate concurrency strategy and syntax but I think we've established now that it won't be happing in node.js but in another still undefined project.

Please start that project, write some code, I'm begging you. Even people that agree with you have to be sick of talking about it by now.

[Stephen Belanger]

I think it'd make more sense to split the mailing list into something like node-discussion and node-suggestions, where discussion is for talking about what's already in node and suggestions is talking about what people think should be in node. It might be handy to split out announcements to a different mailing list also.

--

[Correa Tristain Diego]

Which is the discussion you are talking about? I haven't read it.

Follow Pure Data example, open an announce list and a general discussion list and a developer list for nodejs.

Is a more open strategy, isn't it?

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.

--
http://labormedia.cl/algoritmia

[Marco Rogers]

I've said a mouthful already, but I'll add this.  There are ways to keep your signal to noise ratio low that don't involve trying to convince everyone else to change to suit your habits.  I don't always participate, but I think all the conversations that happen here that are tangential to node are awesome. I learn a lot.

If the core group of people here want a quieter place that is only about node, they would have better results by going off themselves and forming their own group.  Restrict it and moderate it heavily.  That's what the tools are for.  Node is exciting and makes people want to chatter about it.  I thought that's what this public forum was for.  I'm personally more annoyed by those who constantly try to dictate others actions.

:Marco

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.

--
Marco Rogers
marco....@gmail.com

Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it.
- Lou Holtz

[Correa Tristain Diego]

Did i mention i love Pure Data?

http://labormedia.cl/algoritmia

[Nathan]

Mikeal, I really appreciate your work with couchdb and node.js;
however, your attitude needs some work.

On Jan 20, 5:18 pm, Correa Tristain Diego <algorit...@labormedia.cl>
wrote:

> Did i mention i love Pure Data?
>

> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Marco Rogers <marco.rog...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I've said a mouthful already, but I'll add this.  There are ways to keep
> > your signal to noise ratio low that don't involve trying to convince
> > everyone else to change to suit your habits.  I don't always participate,
> > but I think all the conversations that happen here that are tangential to
> > node are awesome. I learn a lot.
>
> > If the core group of people here want a quieter place that is only about
> > node, they would have better results by going off themselves and forming
> > their own group.  Restrict it and moderate it heavily.  That's what the
> > tools are for.  Node is exciting and makes people want to chatter about it.
> >  I thought that's what this public forum was for.  I'm personally more
> > annoyed by those who constantly try to dictate others actions.
>
> > :Marco
>

> > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Mikeal Rogers <mikeal.rog...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> What do you want to accomplish?
>
> >> If you want to actually build something that you and other people can
> >> use,  you have enough people to start a community to build that.
>
> >> As it stands you're just alienating a bunch of people who are trying to
> >> invest in node.js from even considering your future project.
>
> >> This isn't about Ry and Isaacs, this is about the other ~3400 people on
> >> this list that signed up to learn and discuss node.js.
>
> >> There is plenty of interest in alternate concurrency strategy and syntax
> >> but I think we've established now that it won't be happing in node.js but in
> >> another still undefined project.
>
> >> Please start that project, write some code, I'm begging you. Even people
> >> that agree with you have to be sick of talking about it by now.
>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >> "nodejs" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> >> nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com<nodejs%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >> .

> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >>http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > Marco Rogers

> > marco.rog...@gmail.com

>
> > Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond
> > to it.
> > - Lou Holtz
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "nodejs" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com<nodejs%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .

> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.
>

> --http://labormedia.cl/algoritmia

[Liam]

I think you have me confused with someone else. I'm not a significant
contributor to any of the topics you've tired of. I've merely found
them intriguing, and likely relevant to a future wave of Node users. I
don't see how anyone would feel alienated by those discussions.

As for what I want to accomplish, all my node code's on github, I'm
just not ready to announce anything yet. (Hint, it involves new
hardware.)

[Mikeal Rogers]

Here's the thing. We've establish that this is *not* going in to node, that was clear about 60 emails back.

The place for serious suggestions for additions to node core is nodejs-dev, the place for discussion about using node is this list. This is neither.

Building a community is hard. Right you have momentum. It's been bootstrapped from discussions on this list and needs to branch out to be production and not alienate the existing node community.

[Mikeal Rogers]

This isn't necessarily directed at you, there are 3 threads right now that I'm talking about.

[Correa Tristain Diego]

This is starting to appear as a troll discussion. 

I suggest this thread would be cut off the list.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.

--
http://labormedia.cl/algoritmia

[billywhizz]

it seems to me to be quite telling that nobody who is so concerned
about coroutines/threading has posted anything to the newly created
group... http://groups.google.com/group/javascript-coro

[Mikeal Rogers]

If people want to go the standardization route you can also bring this up on the commonjs list, lots of smart js guys there that would have good input.

[Benjamin Thomas]

I know it can be frustrating for those us that have been following this list to keep reading the same discussions over and over again about

a) the async style Node uses

b) adding extensions to Node/V8/Javascript to make async coding easier. 

But let's try and remember that not all of us were so fortunate to have discovered Node a while ago.  New people that are coming to this list are genuinely trying to participate in a discussion of how to make Node better.  It isn't their fault that the decision related to these topics has already been made.  And we can't expect all newcomers to have read the Node Mailing list archives.

Maybe someone (who is more eloquent than I) should create a page on the GitHub wiki with responses to these common suggestions.  It isn't that the suggestions are bad, it is just that, at this time, Node's (Ryan's) stance is quite clear:  

a) passing a callback as the last argument is the simplest and most versatile async style the Node community could come up with.  This style satisfies the needs of the majority of the community.

b) the javascript we are using is the javascript provided by V8. This way Node can worry about making the best darn _javascript_ platform there is, and Google can concentrate on making the best darn javascript language implementation there is.

That way, as these suggestions continue (and trust me, they will continue; we're programmers, we like solving problems, and some people find these issues to be real problems), we will have a place to point people before we get frustrated. Something like: 

"That's an interesting idea.  May I suggest you read page X on the wiki, before you get too invested in trying to convince the Node community of your idea.  Perhaps if you are still interested in trying out your idea you should try the V8 mailing list (is there one?) or the ECMAScript mailing list (is there one?"

I'm just trying to think of a more long term solution to this source of irritation.  Any other ideas?

[Hsu Ping Feng]

for ecmascript, there's a mail list maintained by mozilla:

https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

and for es5:

https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es5-discuss

this is the official mail list for ecmascript discussion. you can meet Brenden Eich there. :)

Fillano

2011/1/21 Benjamin Thomas <benj...@benjaminthomas.org>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en.

--
AUFKLÄRUNG ist der Ausgang des Menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten Unmündigkeit. Unmündigkeit ist das Unvermögen, sich seines Verstandes ohne Leitung eines anderen zu bedienen. Selbstverschuldet ist diese Unmündigkeit, wenn die Ursache derselben nicht am Mangel des Verstandes, sondern der Entschließung und des Mutes liegt, sich seiner ohne Leitung eines andern zu bedienen. Sapere aude! Habe Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen! ist also der Wahlspruch der Aufklärung.

[Bruno Jouhier]

A javascript-coro group is fine to discuss coroutines.

But what people are looking for is just a better solution for async
programming in node (which may or may not be based on coroutines). So
a name like javascript-async would be better.

Also newbies will hit the async issue and will probably continue to
post here.

Bruno

[francisco treacy]

Well put, Marco.

2011/1/21 Marco Rogers <marco....@gmail.com>:

[Tiago Freire]

I have found out node recently, and I am experimenting with it. While I have found the discussions about continuations/coroutines/etc. interesting, and yes I find callbacks overly verbose and unelegant, I understand the core devs position and being a bit fed up about talking the same arguments time and again.

A FAQ, and a bit of extra text in the official Node.JS page can do wonders to direct people to the right places, and will reduce the same topics from being asked here over and over. Just flesh out a bit more the 'Contributing' section about what are the topics of each list, add a few other links to other projects for non-standard ecma extensions/proposals. I believe that will help. 

Having the 'About' link fleshed out in two sub topics: 'What is node?' (node is standard ecma-262 blah blah...) and 'What node is not?' (a place to discuss extensions to the ecma-262 standard bleh bleh...) also helps driving the point home.

These are my 2 cents, and thanks for the devs.

-----
Tiago Mikhael Pastorello Freire a.k.a. Brazilian Joe

[Nick]

I'm not bothered by the extensive discussions on improving the user
experience of writing async code simply because it's the most
significant issue the average programmer will have with the
development framework.

How that question gets answered (or not answered) will shape the
future of node: It could be that no solution to the pain of nested
async calls will take hold, which means that the platform will grow
one way; It could be that people rally behind a particular extension,
plugin, whatever. That would grow the platform in a different way. It
is unreasonable to say that these things are unimportant or tangential
to node. Node is not ecmascript, and ecmascript is not node. You can't
really blame people for trying to tackle the design challenges head-
on, even if it might violate the so-called purity of the language.
Remember, this is *javascript* we're talking about here -- it's
primary use a few years ago was to make a clock follow your cursor
around the browser window.

I think userland plugins and modules--and discussion of those plugins
and modules--are the way to advance in this sphere. It could be that
the best solution is a preprocessor that transforms specialized syntax
into async javascript, AST transforms to redefine code in certain
contexts, or perhaps a DSL that's better at handling the vagaries of
complex event processing.

[Mikeal Rogers]

My comments do not relate to userland solutions to flow control or abstractions related to dealing with node.js' callback system.

The comments relate to a couple threads that want coroutines in the language or in node.js, which would require a fork of some kind or a new project. Ryan has said he won't be implementing them in node.js, they aren't part of node and won't be and they cannot be done in userland on top of node.

For the last year there has been a *constant* discussion about promises, flow control, lispy APIs for dealing with callbacks, etc, and while it sometimes comes back to the same points it has matured and we've gotten some great libraries out of it and learned a lot. I would never advocate that we end that progress.

[billywhizz]

+1 mikael. the thing that has annoyed me particularly is the way
certain people have been stamping their feet and almost demanding that
these kind of things be taken under consideration for inclusion in
node core. that's just arrogant and rude behaviour the way i see it
and i don't think anyone here has a problem with people doing whatever
the hell they want in user-land...

[Isaac Schlueter]

Ok, so I think the vote is:

+12 in favor of putting coroutines into node, +10 in favor of never
talking about coroutines ever again, and +3 in favor of using Rhino.

dictatorship++

--i

[Liam]

Links to back up that pejorative assertion?