3 ms·
Next-In-Thread: --- We see Ivy as a widely used component. We use archiving some components to recalibrate our focus. I don't think that we want to ar
by gsylvie 10y ago
Next-In-Thread:
---
We see Ivy as a widely used component.
We use archiving some components to
recalibrate our focus. I don't think
that we want to archive Ivy in the near
future. Instead we try to push Ivy.
If you want to help with Ivy, you're welcome.
"It's already a challenge to stick with
Ivy build system itself given the lack of
fixes/releases/responses." What are the
problems you think are resolved with new
Ivy releases?
Jan
---
- teraflop 10y agoThat's a nice boilerplate comment that could be applied to any open source project, but the reality is that Ivy is essentially abandonware. At one point recently, I did a search and couldn't find any committer activity of any kind (code, mailing list messages, JIRA updates) for the better part of a year. And it's not like the project is "stable" or "complete" either -- users are constantly making posts about serious bugs that go unanswered, because there's nobody active who has the knowledge to investigate or fix them. (I've run into a couple of these myself.) EDIT: Just took another look to see if anything had changed. The good news is that a couple of very minor bugfixes were committed in November, amounting to a grand total of 14 lines of code changed. There have been no other commits in the past 12 months, and the last time one of the committers responded to a question on the mailing list was March 2015.