Upstream node jls bindings?

[mliberty1]

Hi @biosbob - I see that you forked https://github.com/em-foundation/jls and added node-jls with node bindings for JLS. Once you feel it's ready, I am happy to upstream a pull request. We are happy to take over support of the node bindings going forward.

[biosbob]

the biggest issue is that it’s a *subset* of the current python bindings – just enough to support emscope.... From: Matt Liberty ***@***.***> Reply-To: em-foundation/emscope ***@***.***> Date: Thursday, December 4, 2025 at 11:00 AM To: em-foundation/emscope ***@***.***> Cc: biosbob ***@***.***>, Mention ***@***.***> Subject: [em-foundation/emscope] Upstream node jls bindings? (Discussion #42) Hi @biosbob<https://github.com/biosbob> - I see that you forked https://github.com/em-foundation/jls and added node-jls with node bindings for JLS. Once you feel it's ready, I am happy to upstream a pull request. We are happy to take over support of the node bindings going forward. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#42>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AN2G5OLOC7IKO2DTDBGYTMT4ACAEFAVCNFSM6AAAAACOCJBW4GVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ERDJONRXK43TNFXW4OZZGIYDSMJRHA>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[mliberty1]

Understood. A useful subset is better than no set ;) We can work on improving over time. By upstreaming with unit tests, we will at least be able to know if we break anything for you.