bytecodealliance / bytecodealliance/wac

Merge into upstream wasm-tools?

Open
#153 3 comments 3 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub
Dominant language
Rust
Stars
208
Forks
41
Avg merge
2d 7h
Merged PRs (30d)
3

Description

I wanted to open an issue on this to perhaps discuss this. Currently `wasm-tools compose` prints a warning (rightfully) to use `wac` and in the future the plan is to sunset `wasm-tools compose` and the `wasm-compose` crate entirely. That being said one of the key benefits of `wasm-tools compose` is that it's "always in sync" with the rest of wasm-tools, basically entirely because it's in the same repository. I like the idea of having the two in sync, so wanted to raise the question: would it makes sense to migrate this repository to living within wasm-tools?

The benefits of such a merge could be:

* Integrated release cadence with wasm-tools
* Up-to-date bindings to wasm-tools crates
* Up-to-date on the latest component model features
* (maybe) Better visibility for functionality

Downsides, however, are:

* Monorepo vs multi-repo - CI is more complicated, sweeping changes to the monorepo are harder (e.g. not all contributors will be familiar with wac)
* Less focused issue tracker (more monorepo vs multi-repo)
* More frequent "breaking" releases for functionality that's probably not actually breaking

Would maintainers/folks here be interested in such a merge? Or best to keep things separate?

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.