[geomoose-psc] GeoMoose Supported NodeJS Vesion(s)?

[James Klassen]

Even though if we do a good job, most people won't ever have to build
GeoMoose, my goal is to establish clear expectations for what is supported
so that people who need to/want to build or debug GeoMoose can do so
without a lot of guessing and without needing exotic system configurations.

Maybe nvm makes which node version(s) largely moot.  Building on the
production server generally isn't necessary/advised, so that isn't a huge
deal.

It could also potentially matter for people integrating GeoMoose 3 as a
library into an existing app/page/etc.

On Nov 14, 2017 10:55 AM, "Brent Fraser" <bfraser at geoanalytic.com> wrote:

> Eli, Jim,
>
>   The build toolchain is more important now to us implementers because it
> must be used to debug GeoMoose.  In the past it was possible to use the
> Geomoose_dev.html file to load un-minified version of the code and use the
> browser's debugger to step through the code.  The new dependency on NodeJS
> for debugging is an added burden (but thankfully it is mitigated by the doc
> Jim and Dan have written).
>
>   Since my exposure to NodeJS is minimal (I just used it to help me add
> Bing layer types other than Aerial and Road), I am OK with choice A).
>
>   I wonder how many people debug Geomoose?
>
> Best Regards,
> Brent
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From*: "Eli Adam" <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>
> *Sent*: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 9:23 AM
> *To*: "Jim Klassen" <klassen.js at gmail.com>
> *Cc*: "geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org" <geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
> *Subject*: Re: [geomoose-psc] GeoMoose Supported NodeJS Vesion(s)?
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Jim Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am trying to come up with a policy for which nodejs versions we
> > officially support for the *build* toolchain. My general thoughts are
>
> Do we need a policy for the *build* toolchain?
>
> > either current LTS (8.9.1 now) or current and previous LTS (now 6.9.x).
> > The benefits to two versions is it gives us and others more leeway when
> > to update things. The benefit to one version is that is likely what we
> > are testing in practice and it can simplify the build scripts.
>
> More than one version seems infeasible. We'll actively be working
> with one. Maybe additional versions will work but that could be
> happenstance, not design.
>
> >
> > The nodejs release schedule is here [1]:
> > Node 8.x became LTS on 2017-10-31 and will be supported until 2019-12.
> > Node 6.x became LTS on 2016-10-18 and will be supported until 2019-4.
> > Node 4.x became LTS on 2015-10-1 and will be supported until 2018-4.
> > (We made some efforts to support this version at one point, but it has
> > not been tested in a long time by me and probably doesn't currently work
> > with GeoMoose).
> >
> > I also point out that 8.9.1 doesn't build out of the box on Ubuntu 14.04
> > because the gcc version is not new enough. I'm pretty sure Jessie and
> > 16.04 are ok with 8.9.1.
> >
> > So how do people feel about supporting:
> >
> > A) Current LTS version of nodejs only.
> >
> > or
> >
> > B) Current and previous LTS versions of nodejs.
> >
> >
> > (Note: the demo server is still on Ubuntu 14.04 due to MapScript not
> > being in Ubuntu 16.04. Of course GeoMoose 3 doesn't care about
> > MapScript, but we are still hosting GeoMoose 2.9 demo which does. This
> > could easily be split up so it isn't the end of the world, just where
> > we're at now.)
>
>
> C) Whatever one version is convenient based on a variety of factors
> like MapScript running a previous version of the demo. Not to be
> flippant, but since this an internal facing build tool, I'm not
> convinced that we need a policy.
>
> Best regards, Eli
>
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/nodejs/Release
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > geomoose-psc mailing list
> > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-psc/attachments/20171115/016c95ee/attachment.html>