V8 working group #3741
Description
Proposal: put together a V8 WG.
Rationale:
- To have a side channel for V8 related work without spamming (or drowning in) the main bug tracker.
- To create documentation with best practices for contributing to V8 with the expectation that changes end up in node.js someday.
- To orchestrate V8 LTS work. Related: Option to run V8 test suite build#199
Optional:
- Shepherd patches submitted to nodejs/node. Many fall by the wayside now because contributing to upstream V8 is so onerous. Legalities TBD.
Background:
I picture it not as a WG in the traditional sense with a clearly defined charter and goals, but more as a self-help group where people can go if they want to work on V8 for whatever reason.
Activity
evanlucas commentedon Nov 10, 2015
I would be interested in being involved with this
indutny commentedon Nov 10, 2015
Yes.
joransiu commentedon Nov 10, 2015
Me as well.
thefourtheye commentedon Nov 10, 2015
Me too, if it is okay.
targos commentedon Nov 10, 2015
+1
Qard commentedon Nov 10, 2015
I'm also interested, albeit not certain how useful I'll be.
cjihrig commentedon Nov 10, 2015
I'm interested in learning more about the magical black box that is V8.
ofrobots commentedon Nov 10, 2015
👍
trevnorris commentedon Nov 10, 2015
Does this mean we would fork v8 into nodejs/v8 or such?
jasnell commentedon Nov 10, 2015
👍
bnoordhuis commentedon Nov 10, 2015
If necessary. Details TBD.
misterdjules commentedon Nov 10, 2015
One thing that I would like the project to avoid is to move the knowledge of V8 to a separate group. Having V8 issues/PRs discussed in the main repo has the benefit of exposing everyone who contributes to node.js' core to that part of the code base, and making everyone more aware of its problems/challenges.
I don't agree that the problems mentioned in the original proposal are currently actual problems:
In other words I think that exposing more core contributors to V8 is better in the long term for the project, and I think that creating a separate group dedicated to it may achieve the opposite.
Qard commentedon Nov 10, 2015
By the way, I started writing some introductory docs on node internals recently. I'd love to get some help on more in-depth documentation of our particular usage of V8.
I also created a tool to auto-generate V8 documentation for a specific commit of node. It needs a bit of clean-up though.
5 remaining items
mhdawson commentedon Nov 11, 2015
+1 from me
bnoordhuis commentedon Nov 11, 2015
From today's CTC meeting: no objections, so moved. I'll work on setting up the preliminaries later this week and cc everyone that has expressed interest.
@misterdjules
It's of similar scope as the LTS WG, where LTS-specific documentation lives in a separate repository. I'm perfectly happy with having it live in the main repo if it turns out it has wider appeal. Time will tell.
I'd be happy actually to leave it to the build WG. It's just an example of what a V8 WG could take on though.
pmq20 commentedon Nov 12, 2015
I'd be happy to be part of a V8 WG. I have at least one floating patch regarding V8 that I'd love to follow up: #2999
john-yan commentedon Nov 12, 2015
count me in. :)
bnoordhuis commentedon Feb 20, 2016
Reopening. I haven't had time to set this up. If someone wants to take over, please say so. :-)
thefourtheye commentedon Feb 20, 2016
I am still interested. So the @trevnorris 's question will be addressed by the WG?
bnoordhuis commentedon Feb 20, 2016
Not 'fork' in the sense that it's a permanent, hard fork, more a place for collaborative work (discussion, development, code review) before sending it upstream. The work that @chrisdickinson is doing in chrisdickinson#2 isn't very visible now, for example.
bmeck commentedon Sep 6, 2016
@bnoordhuis is this still an effort?
bnoordhuis commentedon Sep 6, 2016
I guess this can be closed (again) - the current process seems to work okay.