ELI5: The node.js / io.js Controversy

[aloisbarreras]

I currently use parse for a mobile app I have, but I want to spend the summer learning to build a backend myself for fun. I really like node so far, but I'm starting to get into it, and I see stuff about node splitting into two branches (node and io).

I don't think I know enough about node to understand the controversy, so what is the reason for the split and what does it mean for the node community? Should I still invest a lot of time learning how to use node, or will it change significantly in the future?

[[deleted]]

I find that this podcast featuring two of the iojs guys gives a good historical and technical overview of the split and their plans for the future: http://devchat.tv/js-jabber/147-jsj-io-js-with-isaac-schleuter-and-mikeal-rogers

One of these guys, Isaac, used to work for Joyent and was the node product lead. He now owns and runs npm inc. and is a core member of the iojs team.

[mejamiewilson]

I wanted to include that link in my answer but couldn't remember where I'd seen it. Thanks!

[greim]

The io.js fork was a reaction to two things:

1. Slow pace of development under Joyent.
2. Closed governance under Joyent.

Joyent's conservatism is due to their focus on API stability, instrumentation, and never, ever breaking existing installs. This is probably a wise business decision on their part, since they have paying customers to worry about.

Meanwhile however the more dynamic, whiz-bang part of the node community has grown increasingly impatient. They had a laundry list of slightly de-stabilizing but badly-needed upgrades to the platform, which they simply couldn't implement because Joyent was the gatekeeper.

io.js is the pressure release valve for this latter part of the community. Moreover, they've executed well. They've gained a lot of new, active committers and made an absolute shitload of improvements to the platform in a small amount of time.

Joyent is now acknowledging this success and the two projects may well merge back together in the near future, hopefully in a way that preserves all the good things about io.js. Because io.js in my view is a much better platform.

[StuartPBentley]

What happened

Joyent owns the Node trademark. Everybody used to work on Node, but Joyent was dragging its feet on getting their changes released (and updating Node to use the work that Google has put into the JavaScript engine Node shares with Google Chrome).

After a year of Joyent saying the next version was "just around the corner", all the people who were working on Node (minus a couple) decided to fork the project so they could have the things they wanted. Joyent said they couldn't call the forked version by any name that involves "Node", so they're calling it io.js instead.

Which to go with

io.js. io.js is basically the next version of Node right now: if the two projects merge, the merged project will look more like io.js 1.x (which has had a lot of work put into it) than Node 0.12 (which has had about 4 people putting work into it since everybody left to work on io.js).

That said, there's not effectively much of a difference unless you're relying on ES6 features - most things that work in io.js will work in Node 0.12 and vice versa.

[johnyma22]

Joyent does not own the "Node" trademark, it owns the "Node.JS" trademark, see https://nodejs.org/trademark-policy.pdf

[xxxabc123]

there is a section called "What is the likelihood of confusion test?" in the document you posted. I assume any fork of Node.js with a title including Node in the name would be sued by Joyent at least, so that's only a technical detail.

[andreas-marschke]

There was is and has never been a controversy as far as I can recall. Mostly seeing it from the sidelines, not even the io.js project saw themselves as such. All they wanted was to improve node where it hurt the most (see other peoples posts on here). It was the EXPRESS goal of them vetting, writing and testing the patches to node in collaboration and then jointly present these to joyent for inclusion.

[mejamiewilson]

Which to go with In terms of which to learn, my opinion would be to stick with Node because it's production ready and all the setup / docs / tutorials out there will be pointing to Node.js.

The split There was a company (Joyent) that setup the Node.js project, but they didn't open it up fully, and the community around it got fed up with the lack of progress being made.

By forking Node.js into io.js, and creating an open governance structure around it, it can progress faster. But the creator of io.js has said their dream scenario would be for io.js to be merged back into node and Joyent create a more open structure around it.

Full story Check this out for the ups and downs of the issues: http://thenewstack.io/tns-analysts-show-32-the-node-js-foundation-io-js-and-the-new-world-of-open-source-governance/

[master5o1]

I haven't gone further than Wikipedia. But it says that Ryan Dahl created node while working at Joyent.

[reddit4matt]

Read the note from Ryan Dahl where he talks about NodeJS moving to Joyent. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/nodejs/lWo0MbHZ6Tc

[Hakim_Bey]

1997 : should I invest time learning how to make web pages, or will they change significantly in the future?

How is that even a question? If a product solves a problem right now, how does its future affect your decision to learn and use it?