we can cross that bridge when we come to it. IMO, patches against master should be made against master without regard for future plans for re-writes. It's the job of the re-writer to make all the tests pass so if your change goes in with a test it'll still work after the re-write.
-Mikeal On Feb 13, 2012, at February 13, 201210:49 AM, Marco Rogers wrote: > Well there's a separate plan being discussed right now to upgrade the API to > ServerResponse anyway. writeHead is going to be deprecated, so that's not the > best place to put it. But I do agree we should minimize unnecessary > properties on res. It would be nice to have a pseudo standard way of > specifying options across node. I haven't put any thought into it yet. But > one thing I like is just using an options hash. It's not just for functions > you know :) > > res.options.shouldSendDate = true. > > This way we can add whatever we want and the chance of collision is > minimized. Of course options is a fairly common name. That's why it might be > a good idea to come up with some kind of convention. People know enough not > to name a function "on" or close" these days. > > :Marco
