Repo maintained anymore?

[BSmith-APFM]

Just wanted to see if the authors of this repo are maintaining it anymore, or if its been left for the larger community.

[asulwer]

i have always felt this way. there is little to no movement on this repo except to update dependencies

[timophe-91]

When i watched his name up at linked in he stopped working for Microsoft. So We don't know what will happen

[asulwer]

i am actively using this project, i may create another repo and so it can be maintained properly

[abbasc52]

Hi All, I am no longer part of Microsoft and due to my current employment can no longer contribute to this project. I did contact folks at Microsoft but haven't heard back anything. If anyone plans to fork and maintain it, I can help with the knowledge required.

[BSmith-APFM]

i am actively using this project, i may create another repo and so it can be maintained properly

If you fork it, I'll contribute. I'd like to keep this project going, there are not many open source rules engine projects for dotnet out there!

[timophe-91]

I Forked it, because i use it actively too. But I never worked with GitHub actively and would love some help. Or Someone else will fork it and i am happy to contribute too. :)

Edit: started working on it yesterday. Started with removing .net6 because EOL is this year. And update to c#12 which solved the issue with static Methods for me somehow.

Will continue this weekend.

Fork

[asulwer]

i created a fork and i have been actively making changes since. mostly today

Fork

[timophe-91]

Just made the first release in my fork. Updated dependencies and updated to c# 12.0

[asulwer]

Just made the first release in my fork. Updated dependencies and updated to c# 12.0

Neat. Current version of RulesEngine has support for this already.

Now in my fork

• I have solved ALL issues
• new features will be added
• All issues will be solved

[abbasc52]

@asulwer First off all great work! it seems you are determined to take it forward. Just a couple of advice:

• RulesEngine traditionally has been conservative towards making breaking changes, if we do, we give people some grace period to move to new implementation.
• Since your fork fixes couple of issues and adds new features(and potentially breaking changes), it would be great to add a migration guide(in case u release to nuget) . Users might eventually move to the fork but that would require a little hand holding.
• Also you might want to look into the .github folder. It has CI pipelines for PR check. and along its history it had full release pipeline (which was later removed and moved to azure pipelines). It can help setup the release process. You can refer this - https://github.com/microsoft/RulesEngine/tree/0e8a38ea07b4a96ee76da570805a63fa10b80824/.github/workflows

[timophe-91]

@abbasc52

Thank you for the template to the workflow. Just integrated an updated version of it.

[RenanCarlosPereira]

Hey guys, we are using this nugget in one of our core applications… thats essencial we keep maintaining it, count on me on it.

Lets talk to see the future plans for it

Thanks for the great job so far 😄

[asulwer]

@abbasc52 we weren't sure if you were still active. your linkedin profile states you are no longer with Microsoft. we assumed this meant this wasn't going anywhere. if you want to sit back and take a break thats fine, would you be willing to let a contributor move this forward? or maybe separate from Microsoft? my planned direction will continue to make large breaking changes. my fork wasn't to push you out, please do not think that. issues are being resolved but not closed, just doing what i can.

[abbasc52]

@asulwer On the contrary, I want some to take it forward. I believe it is a great project and dont want it to die like this. I have been trying to get someone at Microsoft to take it forward but did not get much confirmation on it.

My comments earlier were just meant to ensure people looking for a maintained folk have a easy way out. If you have a different goal in mind, that is fine too :)

@RenanCarlosPereira , @timophe-91 , @RenanCarlosPereira and @asulwer maybe you guys can come together and come up with a plan and a single fork? together it should be easier but you would need to agree on where this project should head

I know it is asking too much out of you folks given I cant contribute anything anymore. Just a selfish wish to make sure this library remains useful to others 😄

[timophe-91]

I'd love to collaborate on this project, but my main concern is avoiding frequent breaking changes, especially early on. Maintaining backward compatibility in the long run is crucial. Since I'm using this in a working environment, i know it could be difficult to justify (frequent) migrations to higher-ups. Given the limited number of Rules Engines available for .NET, it might be beneficial to explore splitting the project, as this doesn't necessarily have to be a negative outcome.

[RenanCarlosPereira]

@abbasc52 we can do it.
I don't want any breaking changes any soon as we are using it in some big projects.

I just have only one big concern thats come from this bug 🥺

zzzprojects/System.Linq.Dynamic.Core#821

Lets keep this going with minimal breaking changes as possible.

If you guys want we can set up a quick meeting to talk about forks and other stuffs

[asulwer]

@RenanCarlosPereira if RulesEngine is affected please move this to an issue.

[RenanCarlosPereira]

Yeah it’s affecting it, I will open a bug, with an example of unit test on how its affecting it, thanks

But we wont be able to solve it here, only in the lib

[asulwer]

change is inevitable. at the request of users, breaking changes occur in my fork but...current incorrectly created methods have been marked obsolete to support old code. i am moving in a new direction with my fork, so is it a fork? for now yes but in the future no.

[RenanCarlosPereira]

@RenanCarlosPereira if RulesEngine is affected please move this to an issue.

opened a new bug for this:
#614

@asulwer and @StefH
once this version is available
zzzprojects/System.Linq.Dynamic.Core#824

[jerbersoft]

@abbasc52 is there a continuation plan for this project? if you are not working for this project, how are we able to move forward but still making sure that we maintain the correct practice of PR's, code reviews and checks? And who might be the best candidates as the gate keepers of this codebase?

[asulwer]

@jerbersoft did you take a look at my fork? all of the listed issues have been resolved there. i wasn't opening PR's as i should but that has changed

[timophe-91]

@jerbersoft there are different forks now.

[RenanCarlosPereira]

We will try to maintain it in the @asulwer branch
We are going to keep minimal breaking changes.

Please feel free to join as a contributor
Only PRs are allowed, we have 2 breaking changes, not planning to introduce any other breaking changes (not for now)
If we do we will ask the comunity and discuss it together before any release or major changes

[RenanCarlosPereira]

@timophe-91, I have reviewed the code changes from 6.0.0 to 6.0.3 and its safe to make the move

Please be aware about those 2 breaking changes in the 6.0.0, other than that all the behavior remains the same.

[timophe-91]

@RenanCarlosPereira I've got my reasons to not trust that fork. But here is not the place to talk about those things. :) As said in another place, i stay with my own fork. :)

Edit: I already have all the workflows up and running. Also added the open-source plan of Codacy. NuGet publishing is running too. So there is no need for me to change in the future.

[RenanCarlosPereira]

No problem @timophe-91

I got it, anyway, I will try to keep everything in order there, in case you change your mind.

Cheers 🍻