Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

adopting crates from the to-be-archived rustwasm org #96

Open
yoshuawuyts opened this issue Jun 28, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

adopting crates from the to-be-archived rustwasm org #96

yoshuawuyts opened this issue Jun 28, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@yoshuawuyts
Copy link
Member

Hey all, I'm working with the Rust project to shutter the long-defunct rustwasm github org and corresponding Wasm WG. Given we have BA members still actively maintaining a number of crates in the org, and we use a number of these in our projects, I wanted to open an issue here to propose adopting some of those crates in the BA. The full list of repositories can be found here. Based on maintainership, I was thinking the BA adopt the following crates:

  • weedle - a WebIDL parser (particularly relevant for jco, WebGPU, WebUSB)
  • walrus - a wasm transformation library

There are a number of other crates which seem generally useful, but haven't been updated in a minute. But perhaps we might want to adopt these in case they are still relevant?

Process-wise, if the BA does not choose to adopt these crates, they will likely be marked as [archived] on GitHub as they have no other logical place to go. The flagship wasm-bindgen and wasm-pack crates should likely be adopted by their existing maintainers (non-BA afaik), and moved to a different org.

In terms of timing: any migration of crates is pending a decision from the Rust project to move forward with the deprecation of the Rust Wasm WG. I want to make clear that this is not a question about whether the BA wants the Rust Wasm WG to be shuttered, but about the steps that come after.

I'm keen to hear thoughts from the BA steering committee on this; I assume this should probably be raised at a future meeting? But I would in particular also want to hear from @alexcrichton and @fitzgen, who have worked on a number of these crates and are likely to have insights on whether they are relevant to the BA going forward.

Thanks!

@yoshuawuyts yoshuawuyts changed the title Proposal to adopt crates from the rustwasm GitHub org adopting crates from the planned to be archived rustwasm org Jun 28, 2024
@yoshuawuyts yoshuawuyts changed the title adopting crates from the planned to be archived rustwasm org adopting crates from the to-be-archived rustwasm org Jun 28, 2024
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

This seems reasonable to me if we've got BA members signed up to maintain the repositories, so 👍 from me

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants