Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Docs: Thoughts on unification of the utility language? #29

Open
treylav opened this issue Jun 29, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Docs: Thoughts on unification of the utility language? #29

treylav opened this issue Jun 29, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@treylav
Copy link

treylav commented Jun 29, 2023

Hello.

Do you have plans to unify scripting language of non-GML part of the project? Right now, NodeJS and Python are solving problems that are not so specific that you can't use just one, making distribution easier.

Thank you in advance.

@DiasFranciscoA DiasFranciscoA changed the title Unification of the utility language? [FEATURE REQUEST] Unification of the utility language? Jun 30, 2023
@DiasFranciscoA
Copy link
Collaborator

If you believe you can contribute to enhancing the framework launcher, please feel free to submit a pull request (PR). However, it is crucial to ensure that any changes made do not modify or disrupt the existing API. As the internal framework we use, altering it at this stage would necessitate adjustments to other components in the pipeline. Nevertheless, if the proposed change is transparent and primarily affects the underlying language, there is a possibility that it could be incorporated and eventually become a standard feature.

@treylav
Copy link
Author

treylav commented Jul 6, 2023

Yes, I share your concerns, and this is holding me back from working on improving the framework launcher. Since the only way to check the correctness of refactoring at the moment is to run the framework itself using the launcher in various conditions.

Perhaps the right way would be to try to cover the launcher itself with tests to begin with?

@DiasFranciscoA
Copy link
Collaborator

Being an open source project the community is free and encouraged to contribute with their own improvements by creating PRs.

The reason for the project to be written in two different languages relies mainly on the fact that initially the server was running constantly on a web hosted machine that required the usage of NodeJS. To make this project public we needed to create a standalone version of it. And it ended up being just a pure copy of the server code.

Ideally the code base should be written in Python. So, a pure NodeJS port won't be accepted as a PR as it diverges from our internal pipeline structure.

@YYDan YYDan added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 5, 2024
@YYDan YYDan changed the title [FEATURE REQUEST] Unification of the utility language? TestFramework: Thoughts on unification of the utility language? Jun 5, 2024
@YYDan YYDan added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation and removed enhancement New feature or request labels Jun 10, 2024
@YYDan YYDan changed the title TestFramework: Thoughts on unification of the utility language? Docs: Thoughts on unification of the utility language? Jun 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants