Backport WHATWG URL to 6.x?

[jasnell]

Now that the WHATWG URL implementation is close to graduating from Experimental status, I would like to open a discussion about whether it makes sense to backport the implementation to 6.x..

/cc @targos @TimothyGu @watilde @joyeecheung @nodejs/lts

[TimothyGu]

New features don't seem to be covered by the range of accepted changes in the LTS Plan…

[jasnell]

They can on a case by case basis during the Active LTS phase.

[TimothyGu]

Okay, rules notwithstanding personally I think it is a great addition. As a maintainer of node-fetch, the availability of a high-performance standard-compliant URL parser in all supported Node.js versions would be a boon for tricky bugs like node-fetch/node-fetch#245.

[MylesBorins]

+1

…

On Apr 28, 2017 5:16 AM, "Timothy Gu" ***@***.***> wrote: Okay, rules notwithstanding personally I think it is a great addition. As a maintainer of node-fetch <https://www.npmjs.com/package/node-fetch>, the availability of a high-performance standard-compliant URL parser in all supported Node.js versions would be a boon for tricky bugs like node-fetch/node-fetch#245 <node-fetch/node-fetch#245>. — You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#208 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV-kjhxAhM0VpSIKmUh0-zMO8vuBkks5r0VoFgaJpZM4NK6nt> .

[joyeecheung]

Can't see any harm in the idea...so +1

[gibfahn]

+1, seems reasonable once it's graduated.

[targos]

SGTM

[watilde]

Sounds good to me as well.

[sam-github]

+1 once not experimental

[kumar303]

It looks like it's graduated from experimental status now, right? nodejs/node#12710

[jasnell]

Yes. It's no longer experimental

[gibfahn]

This has plenty of +1s, so I guess it's just waiting for someone to raise a backport PR.

[TimothyGu]

Backport PR: nodejs/node#17365

[mhdawson]

+1 from me as well.