Open Stack

On 05/25/2012 04:51 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
>> That sounds good to me, but it only addresses the short term issue.  If the
>> plan is to use Node.js for more in the future, we're going to have the same
>> conversation when that next patch comes up.
> 
> Heh. That was my point to Thierry about 8 messages ago. ;-)
> 
> I totally agree it's only a short-term solution to work with the distros to stopgap the CSS files. But I think it does give us this option:
> 
> Speaking just for myself and *my* view of the Horizon Folsom roadmap (Devin obviously gets more say in this than I do), I think keeping node.js as an optional (but recommended) dependency for Folsom is doable. That way the Horizon contributors can then keep developing the features they want to contribute and believe are important as long as they don't preclude core functionality without node.js, and it would give downstream distros almost a year (to the close of the G cycle) to get node.js into their package systems for production code.
> 
> Just my two cents on this one... my team may kick my a** for it. ;-)

Well, +1 from me.  That seems like a pretty reasonable compromise.

(My team may attack me for that, too.)

-- 
Russell Bryant