[nanomsg] Re: Dead?

  • From: Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:20:12 -0800

Doesn't look promising at the moment.

I think Jack is probably the most qualified maintainer remaining but he never
had git access. I can fix that if Martin or one of the other git maintainers
pipes up. (But then so could they.). It's not clear to me if Jack wants the job
anyway. I never really did, I just wanted to get some of my fixes integrated.

Only one person has volunteered to act as a maintainer after my stepping down,
and I've never seen a meaningful PR or commit from them that would give me a
lot of confidence. Writing a language binding is probably lots simpler than
hacking the internal state machine hell that is libnanomsg.

Maybe it would have been better if I hadn't stepped down and just told the
whingers to STFU but really my life is better not having to feel obligated on a
code base that I've never really loved. Especially given the noticeable lack
of useful assistance in working on it beyond Jack.

I am on the fence about starting a full rewrite using a saner architecture. My
needs these days are mostly solved with mangos and it's getting easier to mix C
and go. So the pressure is less. Especially given that I'm back to doing kernel
work for $job, so nobody is paying me to do any of this work on messaging
systems. (They never were really anyway but at least I had projects which used
them. That's no longer true for me today, although my employer does use these
on projects in which I'm not involved.)

Still it would be nice to have a better option than nanomsg. I just don't want
to undertake another one-man effort. I have enough of those on my plate right

For production cases where language interop is required I would recommend zmq.
It's got a much more robust community.

If you can use go without interop needs then I think my mangos library is
superior to even zmq binding for go. I believe it is probably more performant
and it is definitely simpler and more idiomatic being written in pure Go.

That said, lots of folks are using nanomsg successfully. Sadly very very few
of them are contributing anything back. If the code was largely free of bugs
and complete that wouldn't matter. But a scan of the issues list shows

Unfortunately the code is not particularly approachable for working in the
guts, although the external API is simple.

I hope the situation changes. I just don't think it's terribly likely to.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 20, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles <pgquiles@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


With Martin and Garrett off nanomsg development, I was wondering if it is
sensible to use nanomsg for a new project.

Is there a current maintainer? There has been no commit to the official
repository nor wirebirdlabs' since Garrett decided to give up.

E. g. Jack's commits adding CMake support for Unix builds (something I have
also done, independently), would be nice. At least it would feel reassuring.

Pau Garcia i Quiles
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)

Other related posts: