Option versus Maybe about fantasy-maybes HOT 20 CLOSED

Versioning should solve this for us? Older versions should be on npm (etc) or you can still reference a commit, or just deprecate the repo and start another. As long as we don't have too:

1. Maintain code for the sake of it.
2. Have code that looks overly complicated because we're trying to do too much for too few!

from fantasy-maybes.

It's done!

from fantasy-maybes.

Alternatively, this repo could be renamed, but that would mean that contributors would have to update their local repos.

I think GitHub automatically redirects requests so this wouldn't be necessary. :)

from fantasy-maybes.

I propose that #9 gets merged, that the major version is incremented and a new release is created/published. After this is done, the discussion about replacing the implementation with the one from sanctuary can continue but consumers of this library have the opportunity to use the library as Maybe.

from fantasy-maybes.

I don't care about the name, change it!

from fantasy-maybes.

@joneshf
If I understand correctly:

• Sanctuary does not necessarily want to implement its own Maybe/Option, but perhaps use this library instead,
• Sanctuary does not want use this monad by the name Option,
• This library should not export the same monad by two distinct names,

hence the rename of Option to Maybe

from fantasy-maybes.

I think it would be better to chose one name instead of createing multiple, but same types. Also we can clone this repo into fantasy-maybe and work on that.

from fantasy-maybes.

@fantasyland/core what do others think?

from fantasy-maybes.

We do have to consider that others have already written code with the current naming structure.

Names don't really matter to me. But I would hate for code to unexpectedly break. Perhaps a "deprecation" warning for a given period of time?

from fantasy-maybes.

Whats the best way to move "Maybe" forward? I'd love to help.

from fantasy-maybes.

Make a PR, should be quite simple tbh

from fantasy-maybes.

@SimonRichardson oh ok.
I was under the impression you'd make a new repo?

regardless i'm happy to open a PR :)

from fantasy-maybes.

Added PR: #9

from fantasy-maybes.

Would it not be prudent to create a new repo with a more fitting name (i.e. fantasy-maybe)?

Alternatively, this repo could be renamed, but that would mean that contributors would have to update their local repos.

from fantasy-maybes.

Sorry to seem dense, but I've no clue what's being proposed here. Is there a less than three sentence summary?

from fantasy-maybes.

Excellent! Thanks so much.

from fantasy-maybes.

@SimonRichardson any update on creating a new repository (or renaming)? We could get a baseline going by simply using the renamed code from #9?

from fantasy-maybes.

We should just rename this repo, i'll do it now.

from fantasy-maybes.

Any updates on this? It's been over a year. I agree with @roobie ... It would be cool to see #9 merged and then see whether or not @davidchambers 's Maybe implementation in Sanctuary would fit here.

from fantasy-maybes.

sanctuary-maybe has been released. 🎉

from fantasy-maybes.