uWS reqWrapper not being a Stream about 0http

[schamberg97]

We could also externalise low as an independent project and we can take it from there (this could be my preferred option).

I think this is the best approach, especially since any change to low is going to require a new major version. Moreover, I don't feel that low logically fits together with other 0http components, such as sequential router. low is just much lower-level than the rest of the framework.

[schamberg97]

I forgot to mention that reimplementing reqWrapper will 100% break 1 test ( because it will remove automatic population of req.body with HTTP request's body). That will require a major version bump, but would also mean that low library is more compatible with existing non-uWS middleware.

[jkyberneees]

Hi @schamberg97, thanks for taking your time to improve the low server implementation on top of uWebSockets.

Truth is, I won't be actively maintaining this facade implementation in a long-term view, as the performance difference vs Node.js (cluster on) is not that big anymore.
(Performance also decreases when we put a Node.js compatible layer on top of it)

I would welcome any contribution in case you would like to provide and increase the supported features. We could also externalise low as an independent project and we can take it from there (this could be my preferred option). Please let me know.

Best Regards,
Rolando

[jkyberneees]

I agree, low is actually a "low" level HTTP server implementation.
I will create a separated project this weekend and add you as a collaborator.

Regards