Project activity?

[Routhinator]

Is this project still alive? The issues seem have been untouched for over a year. I'm considering using this in an upcoming project and I'm wondering if the code will continue to be advanced.

[alessioalex]

cc @alexyoung

[alexyoung]

I wanted to work on it, but I'm too busy working on my book, blog posts, job, baby, etc.

[alessioalex]

Totally understandable. Have you considered adding other contributors to the repo?

[alexyoung]

I'd like to do that

[sespindola]

Alex, if you're looking for contributors, I volunteer.
I have some free time and I could help mantain this project.

Regards,
Sebastian.

[alessioalex]

@alexyoung @sespindola I can also help out from time to time, and also for the case there's an extra eye needed before accepting pull requests.

[alexyoung]

I've added you two as collaborators

[alessioalex]

thanks!

[SpiderMatt3825U]

Thanks Alex!

[sespindola]

Thank you Alex

[alessioalex]

Guys there are some pull requests in the queue. I suggest we take a look at them and decide what to merge or not.

[SpiderMatt3825U]

Here is my feedback on the current pull requests:

The "Adding callback when the server is booted" request should not be merged in as-is but can be easily implemented in the current stream. It lacks proper implementation by using type checking and a different method of calling the passed function.

The "Fix bcrypt warnings" request should also be implemented slightly differently but provides the appropriate direction given the use of proper type checking.

I would like to personally work on the "Add Websocket Support" request as it is related to one of the original issues I was observing with this project. I'm in favor of using a less bloated solution for the web socket support such as the WS library or Socket.io's replacement (engine.io). Generally speaking though, the way this change was implemented looks good to me but simply should use a different library. Engine.io would be a drop in replacement for Socket.io and WS could be very easily implemented in place of it as well. WS is at the core of these other libraries so the decision really relies upon whether or not the additional features are or will be needed.

I haven't personally reviewed the changes made in the "Don't remove channel unless all users have parted" request yet so I can't speak on this. I also have not reviewed the "dded support for multiple listening ports and made winston accessible" request but will try to make time to do so in the next few days if not tonight sometime.

Update: I just found the following issue that wasn't queued as a pull request but does include some fixes to be reviewed. I will review this at the same time I review the aforementioned other two that I haven't checked out yet.
"Multiple OPERS cause login, then password incorrect" - #42

Thoughts related to my responses?

[SpiderMatt3825U]

Alex,

I suppose I was not one of the two you added as a collaborator so I can not provide any further assistance on this matter.

[alexyoung]

I can add you, but I don't think websocket support should be added. My idea was to make ircd.js a simple core daemon, and then have ircd-web which would have WebSockets, a UI, and so on. What do you think?

I'll add you as an admin now.

[alessioalex]

@SpiderMatt3825U @alexyoung I also agree that the websocket support shouldn't be added to ircd.js, we should focus instead on bugfixes and the planned features listed in the README file (and review the pull requests too).