Add maintainers and transfer ownership about mio-uds HOT 22 CLOSED

UDS is being included in mio itself: tokio-rs/mio#1098

from mio-uds.

UDS is being included in mio itself: tokio-rs/mio#1098

Ah, missed that change.

from mio-uds.

@alexcrichton looks like there’s interest in ownership. Pinging here because I would like the PR you commented on merged since it fixes tokio on illumos.

Edit:
Looks like I misread this the last time I passed through, sorry about that. It seems mio itself has grown support for uds, but it's not yet in a released version other than the alpha.

from mio-uds.

If the tokio/mio folks are willing to move this repository over as a means of transferring maintainership, that seems like it would work. Otherwise, either @posborne and/or @jclulow and I are interested in stepping up to help with this work.

@alexcrichton What's your preferred course of action?

from mio-uds.

I don't mind transferring this repo and the crate, would someone like to volunteer to take ownership of the repo and crate?

from mio-uds.

Folding it under the @tokio-rs org seems like a natural fit, considering it's one of the primary consumers. Does that seem palatable to the core folks there (ping @carllerche @Thomasdezeeuw)? @jclulow and I are certainly interested in stepping up to help with maintenance if the added burden is a concern.

from mio-uds.

@pfmooney are you talking about maintain Mio-uds for Mio v0.6? Because as @carllerche mentioned in v0.7 Mio supports UDS, e.g. see https://docs.rs/mio/0.7.0/mio/net/struct.UnixDatagram.html. I haven't used this crate so I can't say for sure, but I think missing API in Mio v0.7 (w.r.t UDS) can be added easily.

from mio-uds.

Also cc @kleimkuhler who added support for UDS to Mio.

from mio-uds.

@pfmooney are you talking about maintain Mio-uds for Mio v0.6? Because as @carllerche mentioned in v0.7 Mio supports UDS, e.g. see https://docs.rs/mio/0.7.0/mio/net/struct.UnixDatagram.html. I haven't used this crate so I can't say for sure, but I think missing API in Mio v0.7 (w.r.t UDS) can be added easily.

mio-uds is used by Tokio today. Until Tokio is updated to use mio 0.7, with its own UDS support, it would be nice for that functionality to exist via mio-uds. (And once Tokio is updated to 0.7, for the older version to continue working for a time.)

from mio-uds.

@pfmooney I understand the need to support Tokio, but couldn't we keep Mio-uds as is and say the next version is rolled into Mio? Deprecating (but still supporting) Mio-uds and suggesting Mio's UDS types instead?

from mio-uds.

@pfmooney I understand the need to support Tokio, but couldn't we keep Mio-uds as is and say the next version is rolled into Mio? Deprecating (but still supporting) Mio-uds and suggesting Mio's UDS types instead?

Considering other direct mio users beyond Tokio, it would be nice to have mio-uds in working order without being forced across that 0.6.x -> 0.7.x boundary. If you feel the Tokio/mio project doesn't have the bandwidth to do the mio-uds maintenance, @jclulow and I are happy to take on the task.

from mio-uds.

Considering other direct mio users beyond Tokio, it would be nice to have mio-uds in working order without being forced across that 0.6.x -> 0.7.x boundary. If you feel the Tokio/mio project doesn't have the bandwidth to do the mio-uds maintenance, @jclulow and I are happy to take on the task.

Is Mio-uds currently not working with Mio v0.6? Like I said before it can be deprecated, suggesting people to move to Mio v0.7, while maintaining Mio-uds (for Mio v0.6).

As an aside I personally don't plan on supporting Mio v0.6 very long, preferably the ecosystem moves to v0.7 (which close to a v1 in terms of API) this year. Do note that this is my personal opinion and I'm not the only maintainer of Mio, so others might have different plans.

from mio-uds.

Is Mio-uds currently not working with Mio v0.6?

mio-uds requires minor updates in order to work on illumos.

Like I said before it can be deprecated, suggesting people to move to Mio v0.7, while maintaining Mio-uds (for Mio v0.6).

Agreed. That's why @jclulow and I are interested in putting in the work to keep it viable while mio v0.6.x remains in common usage.

As an aside I personally don't plan on supporting Mio v0.6 very long, preferably the ecosystem moves to v0.7 (which close to a v1 in terms of API) this year. Do note that this is my personal opinion and I'm not the only maintainer of Mio, so others might have different plans.

I agree that widespread adoption of the new version would be ideal. Until the new version reaches the point of ubiquity, it would be nice to to continue the maintenance for 0.6 in order to at least accept minor fixes like these platform-enabling patches, provided they don't seem to risky.

from mio-uds.

@alexcrichton If you're interested in handing over maintenance, @jclulow and I are happy to pick it up via the same @deprecrated effort proposed for net2-rs.

from mio-uds.

Sure, what do I need to do to help with that?

from mio-uds.

Looking at Transferring a repository, it seems like:

• To transfer a repository that you own to an organization, you must have permission to create a repository in the target organization.

I think if you add either Patrick or myself as an owner on this repository, we could then effect the transfer as we would have rights both here and there.

As for crates.io, I assume you just have to add either of our GitHub accounts as able to publish for the crate and we can then do whatever subsequent ACL change is required. I haven't done one of those transfers myself yet though, so I do not know exactly which buttons to push.

from mio-uds.

Er I meant where is the repository transferred to and what does the example of net2 look like. I can handle all the details I just need to know exactly what the details are.

from mio-uds.

Oh, sorry! Our intent is for rust-lang-nursery/net2-rs to move to deprecrated/net2-rs under the deprecrated GitHub organisation that @pfmooney and I have set up to house what we expect to be a handful of crates that are deprecated but which could use sustaining maintenance from time to time while people figure out how to move off. I think we've nearly got all of the approvals at this point for net2, as shown in deprecrated/net2-rs#102. Once that process completes we'll firm up the description of that deprecated status in the repository README.

For this crate I would expect it to move to deprecrated/mio-uds and we would then do basically the same thing: update the README to make clear what the status is, work through any PRs for critical bug fixes or issues like new platform support, make a release, etc. Folks would be encouraged to move to the newer mio that contains the functionality directly, but we'll keep the lights on.

Is that the right sort of detail? If not, please let me know and I can answer whatever you need! Thanks for your help so far.

from mio-uds.

Ok sounds good to me! Want me to transfer the repo to you @jclulow then and I'll add you on crates.io? Looks like net2 is a done deal so I can go ahead and do this too.

from mio-uds.

Ok sounds good to me! Want me to transfer the repo to you @jclulow then and I'll add you on crates.io? Looks like net2 is a done deal so I can go ahead and do this too.

I've invited you to @deprecrated where you should have the rights to initiate the transfer.

from mio-uds.

Ok! I've added @pfmooney as an owner on crates.io and transferred the repository.

from mio-uds.

Ok! I've added @pfmooney as an owner on crates.io and transferred the repository.

Much appreciated. Thanks for your help.

from mio-uds.