Pull requests or fork?

[lyuts]

Hi @rudib , I'm lucky to come across your library. It does state machines the way I got used to. I've seen another issue where you say the project is in standby mode as you currently don't have a usecase for it in order to actively maintain it. I'd like to double check whether you'd be open to pull requests, or instead recommend people fork it?

[chmorgan]

@lyuts happy to see you are picking this library up.

Coming from having used boost::sml in a half dozen commercial projects over the past handful of years I'm a fan of the approach here. Almost all fsm implementations in rust are toy ones, they lack guards, enter/exit, actions etc, things that you need to build fsm based systems. I like this library and I'm excited to see it might continue to be developed.

[rudib]

Status unchanged, I don't actively require a good FSM library right now.

Taking it to the next level (in my imaginary plan) would probably require a rewrite, one of the main features I'd like to add is async compatibility. It also need a significant update to upgrade to syn version 2.

All in all, maintaining such a complex library is a lot more work than people think.

I'm in favor of forking (and renaming) if it's a significant rebuild. Otherwise, I might be tempted by small PRs.

[lyuts]

Thanks for sharing thoughts on future improvements to the library. I can't promise I'll make them, but I'd like to study your implementation and experiment with it. And also, thanks for being open to small PRs. I think we should all be cautious about your time and bother you with important changes only.