Still maintained?

[jepotter1-archive]

Last commit was January 2018. Is this project still maintained?

[wallyqs]

+1 still fan of this approach.

[c4milo]

sadly, I don't think this project is maintained. It will be kind with people to just post a note at the top of the README to state so.

[c4milo]

Just like it was done for the Rust version: docopt/docopt.rs@642e661

[shakefu]

@Aksamyt @arthurschreiber @bicycle1885 @BurntSushi @edwindj @jaredgrubb @johari @kbatten @kblomqvist @keleshev @kipanshi @mboersma @oprypin @ryanartecona @shabbyrobe @voieducode

If the intent is to no longer have the docopt organization maintain this package, can we hand it off to a community maintainer so it continues to be relevant? It's a super useful package for rapidly prototyping Golang CLI tools, and it'd be a shame to throw it away.

If the organization doesn't have the time, I'd be willing to step in and lead the call for maintainers to find someone.

[voieducode]

I think only @keleshev has admin control on the organisation.

[oprypin]

Can you point out some particular things that would need work, not just "had no commits"?

[oprypin]

I may consider reviewing pull requests although I was never involved in this exact repository.
Will also need to check what the story with releases is

[shakefu]

Can you point out some particular things that would need work, not just "had no commits"?

I see several PRs that are still passing which include some edge fixes. But also updating the CI for latest Go 1.16, ensuring the package continues to work into the future, etc. Nothing wrong with a very stable codebase, mind, would be good to see that the community can still contribute back if someone's doing the PR housework.

[shakefu]

@oprypin Any word if this project is going to be left for dead or maintained?

[hoshsadiq]

@keleshev could someone get access to the repo so PRs can be reviewed or something? I'd be happy to step up. I'd like to use docopt but there's a few things that need to be addressed.

[jepotter1-archive]

@hoshsadiq @keleshev I would be glad to help maintain this as well 😄

[oprypin]

@hoshsadiq I have access. But I will not immediately add the first person who asks. If you want to step up, please do review the PRs and tag me.

I still do not see any concrete proposals. Myself, I have no interest in the involved technologies here, but I'll do my best to unblock this situation.
Perhaps the way that this will have to work is by community votes on PRs.

[wallyqs]

It is going to be a bit of an effort to get this project back on track at least initially considering all the changes in Go tooling since them. From a quick overview the project did a GitHub redirection to workaround the issue from old Go versions that did not allow dots in the name (I tried to fix that here #75), and Go modules does not work very well with http redirections from GitHub so there would be a few issues and since this is pre modules likely also need a version bump to v1 before doing that.

If someone wants to tackle things I think this PR would be the place to start: #75
next step would be to enable it with some modules support as in #80, but have to fix the import paths first.

[shakefu]

@oprypin I went ahead and reviewed all the open PRs. #75 probably is the biggest then #80 after retargeting for a more recent Go release. The other approvals are small bugfixes/QoL that shouldn't have significant impact.

@hoshsadiq @JWinnie Do y'all wanna add your reviews as well so maybe @oprypin can get some approval consensus to move forward and unstick this project? 🚀