3 ms·

Actually there have been PRs. At the moment there are 15 PRs sitting on FindBugs' Github page: https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/pulls https://github.

Actually there have been PRs. At the moment there are 15 PRs sitting on FindBugs' Github page: https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/pulls https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/pulls 5 of them are over a year old. Most of them had no review by the development team, and many of those that did, got stuck on Bill, for instance, trying to get Travis enabled: https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/pull/48#issuecomment-141879719 https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/pull/48#issuecom... There is no incentive to contribute to a project in such poor shape. SonarQube abandoned FindBugs mainly because it was low on activity: "FindBugs project activity: The activity on the project is quite low and thus the value coming out of it does not come fast enough to satisfy our users." http://www.sonarqube.org/sonarqube-java-analyzer-the-only-rule-engine-you-need/ http://www.sonarqube.org/sonarqube-java-analyzer-the-only-ru...

nickpsecurity 10y ago
Does the license not allow forking it with group of people more interested in accepting contributions? It has a bunch of users. If my theory is wrong, it should've forked with a lot of updates by now.
- junkster78 10y ago
  Yes, it's allowed ('though the name is trademarked). However, forking is usually harmful (effort spread thin, divergent APIs, plugins, integration with other tools such as Maven, Gradle, ...). On that very email chain, once the sitution was stated and as Bill kept on ignoring everyone as he did over the last year and a half, the community hard forked FindBugs and started aligning behind https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs Bill's reappearance is now puzzling. To abandon the fork to go back to FindBugs would require major leadership changes, as confidence on Bill has been shattered. Keeping the fork leaves the project on the same point people tried to avoid in the first place.
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    In this case, sounds like the source lost interest, a fork didnt have enough to accomplish anything, and now a good project is toast. Despite it being OSS with significant adoption. Sounds like quite a few precautionary tales in this one.

nickpsecurity 10y ago

Does the license not allow forking it with group of people more interested in accepting contributions? It has a bunch of users. If my theory is wrong, it should've forked with a lot of updates by now.

junkster78 10y ago
Yes, it's allowed ('though the name is trademarked). However, forking is usually harmful (effort spread thin, divergent APIs, plugins, integration with other tools such as Maven, Gradle, ...). On that very email chain, once the sitution was stated and as Bill kept on ignoring everyone as he did over the last year and a half, the community hard forked FindBugs and started aligning behind https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs Bill's reappearance is now puzzling. To abandon the fork to go back to FindBugs would require major leadership changes, as confidence on Bill has been shattered. Keeping the fork leaves the project on the same point people tried to avoid in the first place.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  In this case, sounds like the source lost interest, a fork didnt have enough to accomplish anything, and now a good project is toast. Despite it being OSS with significant adoption. Sounds like quite a few precautionary tales in this one.