Move to purescript-web?

[garyb]

No description provided.

[paf31]

I assume purescript-web exists to collect HTML5 APIs like purescript-node does for Node APIs? I'd be fine with that.

I'd like to add a LICENSE file first though.

[garyb]

That was the idea yeah :)

[paf31]

The problem I have is that a package like drawing is then going to depend on something outside contrib. It seems nice to me if we could have contrib only depend on contrib. What's the advantage of having more organizations? It groups things but I think t could actually hurt discoverability.

…

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 10, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Gary Burgess ***@***.***> wrote: That was the idea yeah :) — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[garyb]

The problem I have is that a package like drawing is then going to depend on something outside contrib. It seems nice to me if we could have contrib only depend on contrib.

We already have that all over the place in contrib, drawing already depends on colors for example.

What's the advantage of having more organizations? It groups things but I think t could actually hurt discoverability.

How so? Instead of a random sea of projects that are unrelated, having purescript-node and purescript-web at least groups things by platform - surely that'd help discoverability by cutting down irrelevancies. That was the original motivation behind purescript-node really: you know if you choose a project in there, it'll only work in Node. Likewise if it only works in the browser, it seems sensible to have it under -web - ideally everything in core and contrib would compile with any backend even, or something like that.

[paf31]

You're right, it makes sense to identify libraries which only work in the browser. I don't know if that necessarily means that they need to be in their own organization though. I think of orgs as for managing teams of users, not libraries.

…

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 10, 2017, at 2:27 PM, Gary Burgess ***@***.***> wrote: The problem I have is that a package like drawing is then going to depend on something outside contrib. It seems nice to me if we could have contrib only depend on contrib. We already have that all over the place in contrib, drawing already depends on colors for example. What's the advantage of having more organizations? It groups things but I think t could actually hurt discoverability. How so? Instead of a random sea of projects that are unrelated, having purescript-node and purescript-web at least groups things by platform. That was the original motivation behind purescript-node really: you know if you choose a project in there, it'll only work in Node. Likewise if it only works in the browser, it seems sensible to have it under -web - ideally everything in core and contrib would compile with any backend even. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[paf31]

I don't feel terribly strongly, by the way, I just wanted to discuss because it seems like maybe just another thing to manage.

…

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 10, 2017, at 2:27 PM, Gary Burgess ***@***.***> wrote: The problem I have is that a package like drawing is then going to depend on something outside contrib. It seems nice to me if we could have contrib only depend on contrib. We already have that all over the place in contrib, drawing already depends on colors for example. What's the advantage of having more organizations? It groups things but I think t could actually hurt discoverability. How so? Instead of a random sea of projects that are unrelated, having purescript-node and purescript-web at least groups things by platform. That was the original motivation behind purescript-node really: you know if you choose a project in there, it'll only work in Node. Likewise if it only works in the browser, it seems sensible to have it under -web - ideally everything in core and contrib would compile with any backend even. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[garyb]

Sure, I'm not too fussed either really 😄

[gabejohnson]

I've been waiting on the switch to Effect to tease apart -dom into a few other libs purescript-deprecated/purescript-dom#141, purescript-web/purescript-web-storage#1, purescript-web/purescript-web-socket#1.

I think it make sense to group the low-level bindings to the brower API into a single project.

[hdgarrood]

👍 let's do it.

[garyb]

Done!