Issues? Discussions? - #11
Closed
lishaduck wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Owner
|
Sorry, very much an in-progress thing rn. I'll open up both, they were just disabled by default |
Owner
|
Done |
Owner
|
Oh and yes, more than willing. Probably Node.js native is the way to go. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hello! I had a few questions about the effectdb library, but both issues & discussions are disabled in this repository. Is that intentional?
In the meantime: effect-qb is a Node.js library that uses Bun internally, but effect-db's shebang uses Bun. Right now I'm working around it by installing Bun, but given that Effect is agnostic, it feels somewhat silly. Would you be willing to (accept a PR to) make effect-db Node.js native and/or use prebuilt Bun binaries?