maintainer: discussion thread

[profnandaa]

Opening this as a general discussion thread for maintenance related issues.

[profnandaa]

@ezkemboi @tux-tn -- hey folks, thanks for your reviews so far! :) We have some pending PR's that I've had reservation on, I wanted to have you folks review them and then just put your approve :heavy_check_mark: or drop a comment on it so that I prioritize their landing.

They are listed here

-na

[ezkemboi]

Alright, I will be checking on them @profnandaa.

[tux-tn]

Will take a look too, even if @ezkemboi already checked most of them 😄

[tux-tn]

@profnandaa is chriso still maintaining this project or you are on your own? Some important PR like #1015 are awaiting review since a long time

[rubiin]

i think the project needs some chores with dependencies @profnandaa @ezkemboi

[MunifTanjim]

When will the latest changes be published?

[profnandaa]

@MunifTanjim -- will get back to you. /cc. @chriso

[chriso]

@MunifTanjim – I just published 12.0.0

Thanks for your help @profnandaa, @ezkemboi and @tux-tn!

[vlapo]

Why 12.0.0 ? Are there any breaking changes?

[chriso]

@vlapo I'd consider #1147, #1065 and #1070 to be breaking changes. Strings that didn't previously pass through a validator now do.

[AubreyHewes]

Hey, maintainers, (@profnandaa @ezkemboi @tux-tn -- taken from the the OP; possible owners, code owners file would help) could you all close the issues that have been resolved (by own or via prs)? And the issues that you will never resolve?

The amount of open/waiting issues that have actually been resolved or will never be resolved corrupts the amount of legitimate open issues. Close things with a specific tag if you do not want to resolve them

https://github.com/validatorjs/validator.js/issues?page=3&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen

Thanks!, sorry If that sounds harsh x

[profnandaa]

Hey @AubreyHewes -- your concern is very valid, thanks for raising! We have some long-running open issues that sometimes were left with arguments unresolved, etc. I'm thinking of having a tag for such (for future "resurrection", if ever), and then just closing them.

You've already done a good job flagging some of them, and I'm closing them. Please do raise more that you find, that's still very good contribution to the project. Thanks! 🙏

[ezkemboi]

@AubreyHewes thanks for raising concerns.

[AubreyHewes]

@profnandaa @ezkemboi retrospectively I apologize for being annoying posting this, though the point was that most(sic) open issues are already solved (not closed) will never be solved (wont do; should be closed) or have been solved (superfluous) so unsure how to help on issues.. thanks for the feedback. thanks for the lib. and all your hard work. I also have work to do

[AubreyHewes]

as reference we are also forking our own now, stability was the greatest concern so most of my remarks are moot ;-) x

[profnandaa]

@AubreyHewes -- ah, easy, it's all good :)

Could you expound more on the issue of forking for stability? Anything we need to make better?

we are also forking our own now, stability was the greatest concern

[rubiin]

Also i noticed few issues for feature request were not closed even after their pr were merged. This could give false issues count .

[profnandaa]

@rubiin -- please ping me on such threads, it must be an oversight on my/our part.

[rubiin]

@profnandaa sure. I will tag you if i came across such issues

[WikiRik]

Putting this here so I don't have to make a separate issue for this question; With v14 I don't only want to add types, but I also want to work towards further support for other runtimes (like deno and bun). Therefore I also want to publish this library to jsr.io. Those packages are all scoped. Do we want to reserve @validatorjs so we can publish as @validatorjs/validator? Read more about their naming conventions here; https://jsr.io/docs/usage-policy#scope-names