Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RFC: Renaming "Qwik City" into "Qwik Router" in V2 #186

Open
shairez opened this issue Oct 20, 2024 Discussed in #185 · 0 comments
Open

RFC: Renaming "Qwik City" into "Qwik Router" in V2 #186

shairez opened this issue Oct 20, 2024 Discussed in #185 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
[STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation

Comments

@shairez
Copy link
Contributor

shairez commented Oct 20, 2024

Discussed in #185

Active PR:
QwikDev/qwik#7008

Originally posted by shairez October 20, 2024

What's the motivation for this proposal?

Problems you are trying to solve:

  • "Qwik City" as a name requires extra explanation
  • A meta framework on top of Qwik (which is already very different than any other framework) adds another layer of confusion when learning about it

Goals you are trying to achieve:

  • Simplicity in both learning and explaining about Qwik

Any other context or information you want to share:


Proposed Solution / Feature

What do you propose?

In V2, the plan is to have the only "breaking changes" be the packages renaming.

Qwik will become @qwik.dev/core
and Qwik City will become @qwik.dev/router

99% of the stuff inside of "Qwik City" is routing related - even SSG, loaders and actions and server functions (which are RPCs "routed" to the right place on the server)

So in the end of the day, renaming this package with no breaking API changes (everything will stay backwards compatible with Qwik City) we think will make things easier for Qwik developers.

@shairez shairez self-assigned this Oct 20, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added [STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation labels Oct 20, 2024
@shairez shairez removed [STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue labels Oct 22, 2024
@shairez shairez removed the [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added label Oct 28, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation
Projects
Status: Developer Preview (STAGE 4)
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant