googlearchive / js-marker-clusterer

A marker clustering library for the Google Maps JavaScript API v3.
https://googlemaps.github.io/js-marker-clusterer/docs/reference.html
Apache License 2.0
1.28k stars 775 forks source link

Fear the Repo Dead #98

Open XmlmXmlmX opened 7 years ago

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

16 open pulls, 45 open bugs, the last commit was on 2 Jun. Is this repo still alive?

pabse commented 7 years ago

As this repo is declared unmaintained with dc326b9b9234ce964861eb35b416a6be1ca7d7cf what are the alternatives?

pablomaurer commented 7 years ago

The alternative is, somebody takes it officially up. To avoid getting multiple splitted copies of this repo.

Remo commented 7 years ago

If someone else would join to create an "official" fork, I might help out, just don't want to do it myself.

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

What does "official" mean to you, @Remo?

This is my Fork. Let's merge these PRs to it. I will start with mine #24.

Remo commented 7 years ago

@XmlmXmlmX official in the sense that there's a link in this repo to the new repo where "everyone" is sending their pull requests.

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

What about the license. I'm not an expert to this. Is Apache 2.0 still the best? Should/Could we change the license? Do we still need the hint Copyright 2014 Google Inc. All rights reserved.?

Remo commented 7 years ago

Unlike you I'm not an expert in that field, personally I'd suggest to go with MIT, but we'd have to ask the google guys first.

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

That's right @Remo. I will contact them.

Remo commented 7 years ago

Thanks!

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

Email send at 13:10 (MEZ) to @brendankenny and Luke Mahé.

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

Some additional info about license:

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

News, I've got an answer from Google.

Q: Can/must/should we change the current license (Apache 2.0)? Our suggestion is MIT.

A: According to the Apache 2 license, it's required that you retain it for any code that was originally licensed under it. If you have your heart set on a different license, you might be able to license any new changes under it, but the existing code must retain existing license notices. My opinion is that the easiest thing to do would be to continue using the Apache license (it would also show a sign of good faith).

Q: Do we still need the Copyright disclaimer?

A: See the above.

Q: Can we drop the Contributor License Agreement?

A: Yes

Q: Would you link our new Repository and close the issues section after a migration?

A: We can't do this unfortunately, but you're free to leave a comment in the thread you mentioned pointing to it.

Q: Are there any comments from Google on this subject?

A: Thanks for your help with this!

Remo commented 7 years ago

No problem with the license, but it's a shame they can't link to the fork. That causes the thing I hate about forks, there are too many and not a single one is official. How do you suggest we proceed? Create a new repo using the organization js-marker-clusterer? Want to keep it under your own username?

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

That's true @Remo. I think there is no other way than to comment each of these issues to create this issue again in our new repository. The same for all open pull-requests. Does this sounds realistic?

To create a new organisation like js-marker-clusterer is a good idea. We should do that. Would you create one?

Remo commented 7 years ago

It's a shame, but if we start pulling some of the fixes into the repository we should hopefully get enough traction to make it the inoffically official fork. Invitation sent

XmlmXmlmX commented 7 years ago

Ok, may we should start with the PRs. We could create a Issue in the new repo for this topic and collect there all relevant PRs in a checklist.

https://github.com/js-marker-clusterer/js-marker-clusterer/issues/1

winzig commented 7 years ago

This seems like pretty important functionality for Google Maps. Is there any sense as to why Google is abandoning this codebase? I.e. are they working on a replacement for it? Or is their a competing solution that is more popular?