Stranger6667
commented
4 months ago Hey @DerRidda
Thank you for bringing this up and for your kind words! For the last couple of months, I have been thinking about the next steps for this library and wanted to share my thoughts eventually with everybody interested in using the library.
First and foremost, I want to continue working on this library and bring it up to speed with the most recent JSON Schema drafts.
In the last two years, I've started three complete rewrites, none of which got through. There are two main reasons for this - complexity & scope.
Besides the inherent complexity of newer JSON Schema drafts (specifically in $ref handling), there is complexity coming from the library internals design I am aiming for. There are fundamental design flaws in the original design I made (see #373) that I want to address, and implementing a better design is hard. However, I think at this point I have a vision of how it should look like, to make this library more flexible, compliant, and performant.
I plan to publish the latest rewrite (a separate repo), continue all the development there for simplicity, and move the code here when there is feature parity. At the same time, I want to address some of the issues opened in this repo (e.g. Python 3.12 support which should not be hard) and publish new versions.
A somewhat longer-term vision is to build more components relevant to other projects I am involved in (JSON Schema canonicalization for hypothesis-jsonschema, faster JSON Schema validation in schemathesis, etc) and reuse them. I was postponing them for a long time, but it feels like it the time to get back to them.
If you don't intend to, or simply lack resources for further maintenance, maybe we can find a model of community ownership for the future or could justify your personal time investment via some sponsoring?
Involving the community more will help and I want to have more people contributing & maintaining the library! I also think that the library will benefit if all the development happens in a more public manner (as opposed to my semi-private work).
Re: sponsoring - it is something I appreciate a lot and would be happy if somebody is willing to contribute this way :)
In conclusion, my immediate next step is to write a high-level plan in the form of a blog post / pinned issue and continue with the implementation.
Let me know if you have any questions, I'd be happy to discuss them :)
DerRidda
Hello @Stranger6667,
first of all thank you so much for creating this wonderful library, especially with Python bindings. It's not only much faster than the typical choices in the Python ecosystem, but also more compliant. Since we moved to it, one of our most expensive processing steps has turned into one of the cheaper ones.
Which brings me to my question: What are your plans for further maintenance and development for jsonschema-rs?
I raise this question as I see no commits have been made to master in quite a while and open PRs have not been engaged with and as somebody who uses it in production, it is my due diligence to check.
Don't misunderstood me, I fully understand and subscribe to the principle that FOSS is supplied as is, with no implied guarantees of anything, and I am fully okay with that reality.
If you don't intend to, or simply lack resources for further maintenance, maybe we can find a model of community ownership for the future or could justify your personal time investment via some sponsoring?
Again, thanks for creating jsonschema-rs in the first place, no matter what the answer to this question will be. :)