Seeking Active Maintainer [was: "Is this project dead?"]

[AlexWanderman]

Sorry if it's inappropriate to create an issue for that, but it's just hurts to see such a great library to have a majority of commits being older than 7 years. OpenSCAD constantly throws warnings at me as I use it, but it steel works. It would be so awesome if someone would continue development.

[davidson16807]

Hello, just saw the message.

I do owe it to the library and its users to say something here. I've been off the 3d printing scene for a few years now so it's hard for me at present to find the opportunity to use the library frequently enough that I can see places for improvement and commit the time to implement these improvements. It's also not certain if or when I will be able to do so - a lot of the reason I stopped 3d printing was because I had moved out of my parent's place back in the day and no longer had the space to commit to it, and since then a lot of other projects have taken hold, so even if I am able to find a bigger living space in the next year or so, it's still not certain if I'll have time to commit to the project.

This is not to say I don't still find merit in the project. I am still stubbornly convinced that the approach used by this library is fundamentally the correct one. On that note though I'm somewhat surprised that no one's scooped up the idea in the past few years to either take over the project or make their own version of it. I expected full well in creating the library that somebody would at some point, so rather than bemoan it when it happens I've been banking on it. I'm only one man after all, and I have no intention to monetize the project in a way where this will no longer be the case. The point of the exercise in creating the library is to get the idea out, show a better way to do things, then other folks can do it even better, or if the project winds up being good enough that no one else steps in, then the project just goes on to serve as a very stable foundation onto which other people can rest their code. On that note, sometimes I think a lot of people get wrapped up in iterative development and think that a project has to be continuously modified for the indefinite future if only to show that it is actively maintained. Sometimes there can be value in a project that does one small thing, does it right the first time, then never does anything else. This sort of thing happens all the time in other disciplines like math and I suspect it's one of the large reasons those other disciplines are generally better places to "stand on the shoulders of giants". And stability is especially important in API design, where the future of many projects rests on your ability not to change the interface. This library definitely falls on that topic.

So where that leaves this project: I'm making the following things be known. As of now, I consider the development phase of this project to have completed successfully. It has accomplished all my major design goals and objectives in creating it. There will always be the need for greater documentation and there is always the chance that updates to the underlying language will bring regression, but at this point I must rely on others to step in to address these issues if they come up, either to contribute or go off to create competing solutions I will leave this issue open and repurpose it as a place where others can step forward if they wish to serve as active maintainers for the project. Active maintainers need not worry if they are fulfilling duties since the intent is more just to have a second set of eyes to review pull requests as they come in, if nothing else. I encourage anyone who has contributed in the past (aherm, @aleung, @player1537, @baxerus) to consider doing so, since those guys have already demonstrated willingness to contribute to the project and I think they might grant the project the greatest chance of being actively maintained in the future. In the event a maintainer comes forward, I will transfer ownership of the project to an organization where we will both be granted admin privileges. They'll still have me around as admin just in case they decide they want to go dark afterward.

The issue about warnings is a valid one. I'm going to spend today going over a PR that @aleung made a while ago that he says will address at least some of the warnings (again, apologies for not getting to it sooner). If other people offer PRs in the future then I will make a point to get to them, presuming no other maintainer is found, but otherwise I am not likely to make further contributions to the project.