Even when using gulp, browserify, webpack, etc, I still recommend that people setup their actual task list in package.json so it's more consistently discoverable.
I think it might have been better to specify npm tasks in package.json, then have the pom.xml reference `npm run build` etc, instead of gulp directly. This could emphasize the separation of the node/js world to the app and beyond this, it would allow the client portion of the project to work as so many other projects do in the client-side space today.
Shouts to @nodeaz and the #gulpjs guys.
I've gotten into pushing my eslint and babel configs into package.json ... I know it bloats it a bit, but then there's one non-hidden file to edit.
Also, env already includes the es2015 bits, so don't need them as a separate module.. just env + anything that isn't in the spec yet.
No IE10-11 support should probably be spelled out on the homepage (per your observable dependency)... as many will be severely surprised when they find that out.
How does this perform with *very* large state trees and modifying smaller points? It seems to me that the performance for comparing changes, or tracking changes would either mean a lot more memory usage, or be significantly slower with very large state trees.
I'm definitely glad they decided to delay, looking forward as what's in channel for the V8 changes it absolutely makes more since going this route. Especially how long some organizations have been holding on to older node versions without updating their codebases.
I'm also more than happy to see as many ES features enabled in the box and less need for babel as a build step for server-side code (though it isn't going anywhere for a while).
One thing I do, as I don't develop in Linux, regarding packaging dependencies, is I'll write modern syntax (babel, env, etc) and output to dist, with a package.json with a build date and only the dependencies needed to run... then I'll use docker to get the packages for a linux env, and zip the results... IIRC, my command line for docker is as follows, may not be exact, I'm not at work.
docker -i -v "${PWD}/dist":/app -w /app node:6.10 npm i
This is in my build script (shell.js) and after that I use infozip to zip that directory into `builds/${}package.name}-${package.version}-${package.build}.zip` ... the build date is `new Date().toJSON().replace(/\D/g, '').substr(0, 14)`.
I do similar for my Elastic Beanstalk output, but that will put the dockerfile (FROM node:6.10-onbuild) into dist, and zip that into a bundle without the npm install. It winds up working very well for publishing to AWS.
Cool start... one suggestion in the nearer future would be automatic support for Let's Encrypt. Also, if you're interested in this space, may also want to look at Caddy server.
One thing I do, as I don't develop in Linux, regarding packaging dependencies, is I'll write modern syntax (babel, env, etc) and output to dist, with a package.json with a build date and only the dependencies needed to run... then I'll use docker to get the packages for a linux env, and zip the results... IIRC, my command line for docker is as follows, may not be exact, I'm not at work. docker -i -v "${PWD}/dist":/app -w /app node:6.10 npm i This is in my build script (shell.js) and after that I use infozip to zip that directory into `builds/${}package.name}-${package.version}-${package.build}.zip` ... the build date is `new Date().toJSON().replace(/\D/g, '').substr(0, 14)`. I do similar for my Elastic Beanstalk output, but that will put the dockerfile (FROM node:6.10-onbuild) into dist, and zip that into a bundle without the npm install. It winds up working very well for publishing to AWS.