It might still be good to merge the projects, providing an at least partially common api via two different implementations.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Gary Trakhman <[email protected]> wrote: > CLJX-ing this sounds hard. Clj-time is less CLJ and more Joda. > > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Joel Holdbrooks <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> It would be mega awesome if this clj-time was just a CLJX project so we >> could just depend on one library instead of two. Have you thought about >> asking the maintainers of clj-time their thoughts wrt to that? >> >> -- >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "ClojureScript" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript. > > > -- > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your > first post. > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "ClojureScript" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript. -- Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClojureScript" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
