Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 10, 2021. It is now read-only.

feat(plugins): add butternut plugin #69

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

balthazar
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@jsf-clabot
Copy link

jsf-clabot commented May 18, 2017

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.


Balthazar Gronon seems not to be a GitHub user. You need a GitHub account to be able to sign the CLA. If you have already a GitHub account, please add the email address used for this commit to your account.

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@apercu duplicate #67

@balthazar
Copy link
Contributor Author

@evilebottnawi not a duplicate, the other one is a different one that was made after for strange reasons

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@apercu @MaxGraey guys, it is badly that we have two plugins with same goal, maybe your can unite and put your efforts together.

@balthazar
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MaxGraey
Copy link

MaxGraey commented May 18, 2017

@evilebottnawi You are free to choose which plugin would be in this repo. And I closed Rich-Harris/butternut#124. So we won't collide

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@apercu i reopen this issue, but you seriously should come to one solution, several solutions uglify emerged in about the same circumstances, and this is badly to ecosystem. Beginners can confused.

@MaxGraey
Copy link

MaxGraey commented May 18, 2017

In my opinion the competition on the contrary improves the ecosystem, the choice is always welcome. For example there is the npm and we also have yarn. Both have their own advantages and disadvantages

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@MaxGraey Not in all cases, competition should be manifested when one product does not want to meet the goals that community wait, in your case your do the same thing, it's not a competition but a repetition. It is just my opinion.

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@MaxGraey I do not think you want to see webpack as many individual poorly coordinated repositories, it would be hell for developers. Besides speaking, the issue in which you did not agree is not of a serious nature. You can always ask someone from webpack (slack, gitter, github) community and take it for granted.

@MaxGraey
Copy link

@evilebottnawi So, we have different opinions and that great. But what if one solution better in some aspects or has completely different implementation? Anyway what is the solution to leave it up to you as maintainer.

@MaxGraey
Copy link

I will accept any your decision if it will be useful to the community

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@MaxGraey I'll leave it here until someone else has seen it.

In fact, the main problem is that when you two or more you can make the product better. Also, if one of you is absent for some reason, the other will be able to solve problems and publish new versions. Many repositories are abandoned for this reason. But I have no right to tell you how it do right, just my advice, no more.

@joshwiens
Copy link
Member

There isn't a problem with having more than one loader / plugin covering the same functionality as far as the list goes though personally I try to avoid duplicating libs whenever possible when publishing them.

That said and this is applicable to both butternut plugins, part of the guidelines for the parent awesome-list from sindresorhus is libs need to have a certain amount of maturity before they are added. The generally accepted minimum based on age is 4-6 weeks and normally a few releases as proper maintenance is definitely a part of awesome.

So, all that said there doesn't need to be a choice between one plugin or the other as @MaxGraey said, a certain amount of competition drives innovation but in both cases here the libs need to mature a bit more before they are added.

Both pull request can remain open and we will revisit this topic in the future based on the above criteria.

@joshwiens joshwiens removed their assignment Aug 17, 2017
@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

@ballercat please accept CLA

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

Please rebase

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants