Consider deprecation in favor of mz
kevinbeaty opened this issue · comments
normalize/mz#16 now incorporates any-promise
. Consider deprecating fs-promise
in favor of mz/fs
I love this repo, and I use for anything filesystem related, so I want to track this repo.
@jonathantneal Thanks for the feedback. Don't worry, I'm not in a hurry to deprecate fs-promise
, and there probably is little reason to since it is such a limited scope with little maintenance.
But I am curious to hear why you prefer fs-promise
over moving to mz
. It seems like most things would work if you swap var fsp = require('fs-promise')
to var fsp = require('mz/fs')
.
Is it only because you use it with fs-extra
? (I saw your note on #5) Or are there other reasons?
I was on vacation, sorry for the delay. Yes, I do use this almost exclusively with fs-extra
, but I started having issues where some users would not get fs-extra
, so I had to include my own version that explicitly called fs-extra
.
I'm again thinking of deprecating this module:
For normal fs
one could use mz
.
For fs-extra
you could use fs-extra-promise
Or your favorite promisify
/thenify
wrapper in either case.
bummer. I don’t want to get near bluebird.
Most of my needs are covered with mz
. And after realizing the issue with #7 should likely be solved using something like thenify
, this module would basically be equivalent in API (and implementation) to mz/fs
.
The only exception would be for fs-extra
support in #5 (and potentially TypeScript declarations as mentioned by @olivr70 in #7 ).
I could see this evolve into an alternative to fs-extra-promise
backed by any-promise
. If that is appealing, would you be willing to submit a PR? (Or even be added as a maintainer?) Seems like you are already most of the way there with your custom implementation.
If you end up accepting that other pull request, we can probably close this issue.
@jonathantneal OK. You've convinced me :) I'll close this issue. Thanks for your help and interest.