Is this project dead ?

[ghost]

Last activity was 5 months ago.

[akuckartz]

At least there are people watching the project ;-) An Open Source project is not necessarily dead just because no code has been changed for some months.

[ghost]

But no one is merging pull-requests.

[akuckartz]

@Monochrome100 You could send mail to dma@subgraph.com to ask David Mirza about that.

[mikehearn]

We've forked the project for bitcoinj (it's included in our source tree) and are fixing thread safety issues at the moment. If you'd like to use an improved (we think!) version please grab it from there. At some point we may turn it into a separate repository, rename the packages etc and do a "proper" fork if Bruce doesn't start maintaining the project but for now we're just doing it for our own purposes.

[mikehearn]

Update: our copy of Orchid has many fixes and continues to be maintained. For example we just update the directory authority list to reflect the addition of longclaw:

bitcoinj/bitcoinj@1e8d249

[pacher]

@mikehearn Thank you guys for all the work! I would be happy to see a proper fork maintained by bitcoinj team.
Just had to say it, in case you are not getting enough feedback :)

[mikehearn]

Well, we only change it when we need to really. It's only very lightly maintained. But yes we should upload the fork and do it properly at some point.

[pacher]

Sure, I understand that. But I hope that such a fork may attract other developers interested in pure java tor implementation. For example, as you know, folks from i2p project are also fixing little things they need. May be somebody else does, but doesn't bother submitting PR to the dead project. Proper fork will give a ground to centralize these efforts. And finally, fork from bitcoinj team will give confidence on quality and that it will not just die like this one... That's what I mean by hoping that you will do it :)

[hoijui]

i would alos be interested in seeing a propper fork recieving updates.

[mikehearn]

@brl has merged many of the fixes from bitcoinj upstream, so you can use this code again now. I don't think there are any outstanding changes he missed but if there are, we'll submit them as pull requests now.