Collaborators

[joshwnj]

Dear

• @B-Stefan
• @EugeneHlushko
• @roopemerikukka
• @eek
• @Andarist
• @neeharv
• @rmariuzzo
• @timtyrrell
• @zakness
• @jedwards1211
• @bramschulting
• @gaearon
• @danistefanovic
• @neurosnap
• @julienbachmann

thank you for your past contribution to this project! If you would be interested to become a collaborator, I would love to collaborate with you :) Just put your name down and we can talk plans.

Next week I'll kick off a discussion around next steps, including:

• improving demos & documentation
• rewrite for version 4, and important considerations for upgrade path
• your idea!

Thanks again for your help

[jedwards1211]

@joshwnj I'm always too busy but I do have some ideas about what I'd like the version 4 API (or maybe just a minor release) to look like, so I'll try to contribute, and count me in the discussion at least. I'd also be happy to set up code coverage for the tests.

Also I was thinking a great demo would be one of those snazzy staggered animations that start when something first becomes visible. I could whip one up at some point using react-motion.

[joshwnj]

@jedwards1211 great ideas, thanks.

[EugeneHlushko]

Hi @joshwnj ,
If i found time count on me, we are getting tons of work lately in the company but who knows. I still think this repo is very useful to the community. 👍

[eek]

Hi @joshwnj, I'm always with an eye around, especially since I'm using react-visibility-sensor in quite a big project, and would definitely love to see faster response times, I'm always using it from a fork which is annoying. haha xD

[timtyrrell]

I am not currently using the project (I just noticed that bug I fixed when I was reviewing it for possible use), not interested but good luck 😁

[joshwnj]

@eek I'll be very glad to have your help - thanks! :)

@falcon1kr please consider yourself added to this invitation as well :)

[Andarist]

hi @joshwnj , aint sure how much involved I can be, but I might try to do some work to the extents of my possibilities

[jedwards1211]

@joshwnj Hi josh, I was looking into adding code coverage, but I've never used browserify before. (Is there any particular reason you use it instead of webpack, or are you just more familiar with it?)

I have a react-library-skeleton project that supports code coverage and is ready to drop code into, so I could try putting your source/test code into it. However, it has some major differences -- it uses babel, webpack instead of browserify, and jsdom instead of karma. I'm not sure if jsdom completely simulates the scrolling and visibility needed for the tests, but I could find out. It is faster than karma so that's a plus, but I can understand if you're nervous about whether it behaves the same way as real browsers.

Would you like me to experiment with putting your code into my skeleton? I could also easily convert your code to ES2015 in that case. If not I could look into using karma-coverage instead.

[joshwnj]

Hey @jedwards1211 sounds cool. Would be very interesting to try it out, but as it's quite a big shift away from the current codebase let's consider it a fork rather than a PR at this stage.

Is there any particular reason you use [browserify] instead of webpack, or are you just more familiar with it?

bit of both :) I think for this case at least, a lighter-weight option is better.

I'm not sure if jsdom completely simulates the scrolling and visibility

yeah I would question that too. I originally started out with jsdom tests for this but there were a few weird edge cases that made me switch to testing in a real browser.

I could also easily convert your code to ES2015

Are there any parts of ES2015 that you think would add significant value to this project? I'm happy with it in general, I'd just want to make sure it was worth the extra tech overhead before going down that path here.

[Andarist]

Are there any parts of ES2015 that you think would add significant value to this project? I'm happy with it in general, I'd just want to make sure it was worth the extra tech overhead before going down that path here.

For once React.createClass is not staying with us for much longer, from what I know.

[joshwnj]

@Andarist do you have any links on that topic? I've heard similar rumours but haven't yet seen anything in writing :)

[neeharv]

I'd be happy to help modernize the code base. In terms of deprecating createClass, here's the link to the PR that removes it - facebook/react#9232 We could run a codemod to speed up the process, rather than do it by hand.

…

On Thu 6 Apr, 2017, 4:34 AM Josh Johnston, ***@***.***> wrote: @Andarist <https://github.com/Andarist> do you have any links on that topic? I've heard similar rumours but haven't yet seen anything in writing :) — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#72 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABsS4ciC3GyTOWAreB7HB2rcVyaunwx7ks5rtB3ugaJpZM4MyNtO> .

[joshwnj]

Thanks for the link @neeharv - I'm AFK for the next couple of days but will read when I get a chance :)

[roopemerikukka]

You can count me in! Currently I have very limited time for additional work but I truly hope that it will change soon :P

[falcon1kr]

@joshwnj thanks for the invite. Count me in as well, although, as others, I may only be able to invest limited amount of time.

[joshwnj]

Thanks @roopemerikukka & @falcon1kr

[neeharv]

Since a few folks (including me!) have chimed in about helping with modernising the codebase, I've created an umbrella issue for discussion about that - #75