Rocket web framework description inaccurate

nicoburns / blessed-rs

A community guide to the Rust ecosystem

https://blessed.rs

1.32k stars 77 forks source link

Rocket web framework description inaccurate #10

Closed baarkerlounger closed 2 years ago

baarkerlounger commented 2 years ago

The guide currently says that "development has stalled. Avoid for new projects".

Rocket has had a new release tagged in July this year (0.4.11), a new release candidate for the next version bump tagged in May (0.5), and has an active development channel that includes the primary developer on Matrix.

The description here doesn't seem to accurately reflect Rocket's status.

conways-glider commented 2 years ago

I'd disagree with this - while it has some degree of active development, it has also certainly fallen behind libraries like axum, actix, and tide. Having followed Rocket's 0.5 milestone for a few years now, I'd certainly classify it as "stalled".

BlackDex commented 2 years ago

There is going to be a whole foundation being setup around Rockets framework, as is discussed a few times in matrix. Stuff like this does take time. But it certainly isn't stalled i think. It maybe is s but slowed down. But telling people to avoid it is a bit too much.

Last commit is from September. And there are other crates it uses which are also maintained by some of the main developers which are also getting patches done because of rocket.

StevenBlack commented 2 years ago

It's painful, but I have to agree with @conways-glider.

For example, this PR is straight-up clear doc fixes, easy pickings, totally valid, yet open and unacknowledged for 17 days.

At some point, people who care stop caring. That's a shame.

I wish Rocket wasn't stalled, but it is.

passcod commented 2 years ago

Uh, I don't have a horse in any race here, but 17 days is not exactly "stalled", especially for a trivial low priority PR.

For a quick comparison, lazy_static's last commit was in April, and it hasn't had a release in over 2 years, and yet it only rates an "older crate" mention in this guide.

nicoburns commented 2 years ago

So I'm not really willing to recommend rocket. This is because:

I don't want to recommend the 0.4 series due to lack of async support and nightly requirement.
I don't want to recommend the 0.5 series as it hasn't yet had a stable release, and releases have been around a year apart. This includes bugfix/security releases, which I do not consider for software exposed over a network.

Criteria for recommendation would be a regular release schedule of the 0.5 series, and given the development history preferably also a second maintainer with release permissions.

That said, I would be willing to change the wording. Perhaps "intermittent" would be more accurate than "stalled"?