kennethreitz / records

SQL for Humans™
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/records/
ISC License
7.16k stars 574 forks source link

Would `records` benefit from a backup maintainer #144

Open vlcinsky opened 6 years ago

vlcinsky commented 6 years ago

Similarly to tablib (see kennethreitz/tablib#329) records project could benefit from additional maintainer.

Facts:

To summarize:

Proposal for next actions:

Tethik commented 6 years ago

I agree that having more maintainers would be helpful. I noticed that it takes long to push new versions and resolved issues go unclosed.

While I'm not super into the specifics, there seems to also be the issue around connection pooling #131 which I believe could use some feature push. Without it I think the library is not that useful on it's own, and most developers end up going back to sqlalchemy. Having another maintainer might also help write these types of new features.

vlcinsky commented 6 years ago

@kennethreitz allowed me to manage pull requests (thanks).

We shall see how I will manage (some PRs are already merged) and how we manage publishing new versions into pypi.

For this reason I will keep the issue open and possibly close that at the moment, next version appears on pypi.