Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

README: Add note about maintenance status of iron #576

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 9, 2018

Conversation

@robinst
Copy link
Contributor

robinst commented Feb 8, 2018

The last release of iron (0.6.0) took months to do and required a lot of pushing
from an outsider (me), see #551. Given that, I think it's fair to say that iron
is unmaintained and at this point I would advise new people not to use it.

If any of that changes, we can remove the notice again.

CC @untitaker

The last release of iron (0.6.0) took months to do and required a lot of pushing
from an outsider (me), see #551. Given that, I think it's fair to say that iron
is unmaintained and at this point I would advise new people not to use it.

If any of that changes, we can remove the notice again.
@sunng87

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

sunng87 commented Feb 8, 2018

There is a badge for the maintenance status, https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/manifest.html

Maintenance: status is required Available options are actively-developed,

passively-maintained, as-is, none, experimental, looking-for-maintainer

and deprecated.

maintenance = { status = "..." }

Of course an unmaintained repo won't get chance to put this on crates.io 😝

By the way, I forked iron and picked up #523 from @MJDSys , fixed some deprecation warnings. Not sure if I could manage to get it to right direction, but I definitely love the architecture and have some ideas to try.

@remram44

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

remram44 commented Feb 8, 2018

Probably a lot of people are happy/interested to take over, it would be really sad to see such a prominent framework die because the team doesn't have release access or time. Maybe get some more people on board?

Otherwise forking might be an option.

@untitaker untitaker merged commit 9e5bccb into iron:master Feb 9, 2018
1 check passed
1 check passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@untitaker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

untitaker commented Feb 9, 2018

Thanks. I personally would recommend forking iron. Access to resources/services is scattered and not well-organized.

@robinst robinst deleted the robinst:patch-1 branch Feb 10, 2018
@robinst

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

robinst commented Feb 10, 2018

For anyone considering forking:

  • I think one of the things that's annoying about releasing iron at the moment is that it's scattered across so many repos, and each one has to be released separately. I would look at consolidating them into one repo with a cargo workspace.
  • Probably keep the version the same across all the crates
  • If you're gonna have new crate names, probably give them all a common prefix (instead of just router, etc)
@ingalls ingalls referenced this pull request Feb 12, 2018
@sunng87

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

sunng87 commented Feb 23, 2018

A few ideas I want to try in my fork:

  • Iron-API: Seek to create a relatively stable API for Request, Response and Middleware. App developers and middleware developers will use this API and never care about actual server impl. It can be great if the API is independent to underlying implementation, for example, does not involve hyper types like Body, while keep the performance. Consider it as the serde crate for Iron.
  • Iron-Server: Keep track with latest Hyper/Tokio/Futures development to ensure backend solid and up to date.
  • Iron-middlewares: keep some essential middlewares maintained and released together just like the stdlib.
equal-l2 added a commit to equal-l2/awesome-rust that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2018
Iron is not active anymore.
See iron/iron#576.
@phlmn phlmn referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2018
@phlmn phlmn referenced this pull request Jul 6, 2018
5 of 11 tasks complete
zgtm added a commit to zgtm/iron that referenced this pull request Jul 18, 2018
As Iron is being maintained again and is about to release a new version using hyper 0.12, this note is removed in order to not discourage people from using iron.

This reverts commit 9e5bccb.
phlmn added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 19, 2018
Revert "README: Add note about maintenance status of iron (#576)"
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.