You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 5, 2019. It is now read-only.
I talked to a couple of people about this when both projects were in earlier stages, mostly to avoid solving the same problem.
My personal current take is, it's an interesting proposition for Arbiter, but I'm not sure what the upside would be for Yarn. It already works—quite well, from the looks of it—and may have different development constraints (e.g., compatibility with npm) than we do.
I wasn't expecting it would be a change that would be taken lightly but thought maybe the idea of using a tried and tested set of core functionality might be appealing over writing and maintaining it in Yarn.
Other potential benefits could be related to performance and reliability as Arbiter is improved and addresses edge cases found as a result of usage in other languages/ecosystems through bindings.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Yesterday, Facebook announced a new package manager for JavaScript called Yarn.
Yarn is a collaboration between Facebook, Exponent, Google, and Tilde.
It's early days but once the Node bindings (and underlying core lib) are more mature it could be worth trying this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: