Status re Pulsar?

[claytonrcarter]

Hi there. First off, thank you for creating and maintaining this plugin over the years. It really is a gem!

With Atom having been sunset, and Pulsar rising from those ashes, what are your thoughts on the current status of this plugin? Are you still using it and interested in maintaining it? Are you doing so in Atom, or in Pulsar, or something else?

I ask because I've recently come back to "Atom" in the form of Pulsar. It's the actively-maintained-and-developed community fork of Atom, and one thing they've added is a new tree-sitter implementation. The new implementation is – unfortunately – incompatible with this plugin, but I have a fix in place locally (and a PR in review @ Pulsar), and I'm wondering how to proceed here.

• If you're no longer using/maintaining this, I am willing to take over (here or on a fork) and make the updates needed to get it working again, and to get it published to the Pulsar package registry.
• If you are still using/maintaining this, I'd love to talk about how I can help it continue working for Atom & Pulsar & wherever else it's in use.

Thank you again!

[sharedprophet]

Hi. 😄

With the sunset of Atom I switched over to using vscode as my main editor, and unfortunately the architecture of vscode doesn't allow for a plugin with the full functionality of semanticolor. I hadn't heard of the Pulsar editor yet, so this is good news. I thought I was out of luck as far as ever being able to use semanticolor again. Hopefully your PR to get the text of leaf nodes is approved and merged soon.

Having someone else to help maintain this would be great. I am probably not going to be able to dedicate time to figuring out and switching editors in the immediate future, so for now I'm still on vscode. Since Atom is no longer being maintained, I don't have a problem with switching this plugin to support Pulsar only in future versions. I don't believe this plugin has ever worked with anything but Atom.

When I took over here, I was just given permissions to maintain this fork. I may be able to grant you the same permissions, or if you want to create a fork I'd appreciate getting permissions on that one for if/when I come back to it. I don't have a strong preference either way as this isn't actually my own fork in the first place. 😄

[claytonrcarter]

Hi! 👋

switched over to using

Yeah, totally understandable. I rage quit Atom when it was sunset, and I'm cautiously optimistic about the momentum that i see in Pulsar.

don't have a problem with switching this plugin to support Pulsar only

OK, good to know! I haven't started working on moving anything over to the Pulsar package registry yet, but I will want to if/when my Pulsar PR is merged and I get my local fix to where I want it. For now, I have some housekeeping updates that I'd like to add, the first of which is #49, and then I have a followup where I add prettier and format all the things.

grant you the same permissions, or if you want to create a fork

Great, thank you! If it's all the same to you (and @digitallyserviced 😄) I think I'd like to keep things here, just for consistency. If you can't add the permissions for me, then I can move it over to my fork.

Thanks again!

[sharedprophet]

I don't seem to have access to grant permissions here. @digitallyserviced?

[digitallyserviced]

@claytonrcarter @sharedprophet I dont mind granting permissions, however I do have a couple of questions.

It has been a while since I have checked up on this repo due to dropping atom long ago. @sharedprophet has done a great job at taking care of it.

I am curious as Atom is EOL, but may still be in-use. Can we freeze/lock the main branch for any legacy Atom users and have Pulsar be continued on a separate branch? While this may not be any different then just @claytonrcarter forking and such, I do know that the association with this original repo for the plugin but now also having additional support that would not regress any "existing" Atom users, would make me feel much safer in adding collaborators.

Even if there would be additional PR's to add to the main branch to allow pulsar's metadata to point to the additional branch, or scripting/structuring to handle keeping the Atom and Pulsar plugin's states as separate as possible, while re-using parts, would make me feel more secure in these changes.

I am not trying to be difficult but as I am comfortable with @sharedprophet, but do not really trust anyone, and I worry about supply-line/dependency/opensource code injection by bad actors. While I do not believe or assume anyone is a bad actor, nor a bad coder, I do not want to disrupt or open up complications or security problems for anyone.

I am not sure about the best steps though because I use neovim now, and do not know how best to work this so that it would be useful for Pulsar people, and again avoid disruption for any existing users. (if there are any) lol

I apologize for the delay in response. Please I would love to hear more and understand what @sharedprophet years of xp handling the repo, and any new goals I can assist with.

I would transfer ownership but I would assume that would fuck up any repo URL's in plugin registries and such.

[sharedprophet]

I think the Atom package manager doesn’t have a back end anymore, so even if we wanted to release a new version to fix something for Atom, we couldn’t. IMO a fork would be a nice clean break since it’s going to be in a different package manager anyway.

[digitallyserviced]

@claytonrcarter @sharedprophet

If there is a new fork or continuation of this, and the maintainer would benefit from a mention/link/reference to it from the README submit a PR!

I think that would be good and easily doable as long as it mentions the deprecation/eol/reasoning for this repo and then the new fork link.

Add it to the beginning of the README with a break/hr/p marking a separation.