Kayak is looking for a new maintainer

[Benjamin van der Veen]

It's time for me to move onto new projects, so Kayak is looking for a
new maintainer. Let me know if you've any interest.

Benjamin

[Chip Salzenberg]

Remarkably bad timing; I was about to use it in a real project. Maybe
that means I'm volunteering? I would ask for explanation from time to
time...

On Dec 11, 1:53 pm, Benjamin van der Veen <b...@bvanderveen.com>
wrote:

[Benjamin van der Veen]

On Dec 11, 2011, at 9:27 PM, Chip Salzenberg <rev....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Remarkably bad timing; I was about to use it in a real project. Maybe
> that means I'm volunteering? I would ask for explanation from time to
> time...

I'm happy to give guidance and answer questions regarding Kayak. If you or anyone is interested in picking up the project, some knowledge transfer is only fair. Let me know if I can be of any help.

[Chip Salzenberg]

All righty then. I'll carry the ball forward. Thanks, I think. :-)
First thing: Could you explain or point to the docs related to Oars
integration? Lacking Oars, what's the thread behavior of the server
with relation to number of open sockets?

On Dec 11, 9:35 pm, Benjamin van der Veen <b...@bvanderveen.com>
wrote:

[Benjamin van der Veen]

On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Chip Salzenberg <rev....@gmail.com> wrote:
> All righty then.  I'll carry the ball forward.  Thanks, I think.  :-)
> First thing: Could you explain or point to the docs related to Oars
> integration?  Lacking Oars, what's the thread behavior of the server
> with relation to number of open sockets?

Oars was originally meant to implement the Kayak socket API in terms
of libevent. About a year or so ago I redesigned that API, implemented
it in terms of the .NET BCL Socket class and never got around to
implementing it in terms of Oars/libevent.

These days, libevent is not the hot library in this space. What you're
looking for is libuv, Ryan Dahl's cross-platform evented IO package,
which is used now in Node.JS.

Kerry Snyder wrote libuv-csharp, which is essentially what Oars was
for libevent, a simple wrapper around the C API. I haven't kept up
with the development of libuv-csharp, but it looked good when it
started. Anyway, it would be easy to implement the Kayak socket API in
terms of libuv-csharp/libuv.

The default threading behavior, as far as the user is concerned, is an
event-loop model. DefaultKayakScheduler spawns a worker thread that
services all of the sockets. All callbacks received by the user happen
on the event-loop thread. All calls made by the user into Kayak must
happen on an event-loop thread, otherwise the system will probably
blow up in unpredictable ways. The only thread-safe call in the whole
system is IScheduler.Post, which queues up work on the event loop.

The default socket impl (System.Net.Sockets.Socket) uses the async
Begin/EndRead/Write method of the Socket class. All callbacks are
delegated back to the event loop using DefaultKayakScheduler.Post.

[1] https://github.com/joyent/libuv
[2] https://github.com/kersny/libuv-csharp

[Chip Salzenberg]

This is going to seem a bit sudden but.. Please consider me un-
volunteered. Thank you muchly for the info; I hope someday it is
useful to me (or someone else).

[Benjamin van der Veen]

Please CC the list. :)

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Tomas Roos <ptoma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey!
>
> I actually have a lot of interest in this project.
> To be honest i have not been very active in the progress and the code in the
> project.
>
> But I know the main strategy for the software and its a area that has been
> interesting me for several years.
> That is, performance, http servers, benchmarks, *nix ect.
>
> I will take a look at the repo during the next days and would like to have
> at least some skype hand overs if it were me which would take responsibility
> for this.

Certainly! Take a look and let me know if you have any questions.

> Currently i work at a product company which enables me to allocate time for
> this project both at work and spare time.
> Its also possible at the position I'm in to actually use it for some of our
> products (which probably gains the maturity of the software).
>
> Is there a todo / backlog list of items that is preferred before a 1.0
> release ?

There are a lot of possible features. These basically are all the
things that could be done eventually:

https://github.com/kayak/kayak/issues?sort=created&direction=desc&state=open

That said, the question of when to call it 1.0 is a totally separate issue. ;)

> Best regards,
> Tomas Roos

[Dale Ragan]

I may be interested in backing the development of Kayak inside Moncai (http://moncai.com) if nobody objects.  This would allow us to sponsor it and to make sure development continues. Let the discussion begin!

Cheers,

Dale

[and...@selfinflicted.org]

I really like Dale's suggestion.. Not that it's my place to decide though =)

[Louis DeJardin]

It does sound like a good fit (as another bystander's two cents)... Not that it's my place to ask, but comfortable with continuing via OSS license? Happy in the knowledge this provides an invaluable service to all .net hosters and developers?

---

From: and...@selfinflicted.org
Sent: 12/12/2011 1:57 PM
To: kayak...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Kayak] Re: Kayak is looking for a new maintainer

[Benjamin van der Veen]

Dale, could you elaborate on what exactly you're proposing?

[daniel carli]

I guess that is only a option if they could hold  the OSS license

2011/12/12 Benjamin van der Veen <b...@bvanderveen.com>

--
Daniel Carli

dcrlz.tumblr.com

[Dale Ragan]

Hey Ben and Louis,

> Dale, could you elaborate on what exactly you're proposing?

The project will stay as it is, open-source, Moncai would just be the
owner/maintainer, if you decide to transfer it to us. We would still
accept patches as long as they coincide with the project goals. We do
not want to take the project away from the community.

Dale

[Tomas Roos]

So guys, has there been any progress yet how we want to continue this?

Does everyone think that there is a good deal that Dale/Moncai is a owner/maintainer of this project?

I'll be happy to help out with this.

Shall we take a decision to be able to move forward.

Best regards,

Tomas Roos

[Benjamin van der Veen]

If Moncai is not providing any kind of financial support I would prefer that it remain a community project. Without funding or other material contribution I don't see a case for IP transfer.

But perhaps I'm missing something?

[Dale Ragan]

Hi Ben,

I think you're missing what I mean.  Moncai would be the financial support for Kayak if you transfer to us.  I'm sorry that I didn't actually say it.  I just thought it was implied with being the owner/maintainer.  We have plans to use Kayak and we would love to take it over and take the responsibility of moving it forward.  Eventually when Moncai hires developers, we would even have developers getting paid to work on moving Kayak forward.  The project will remain open-source and take contributions from the community.  The same community will be able to take advantage of our work.  Let me know if you have any other questions.

Thanks,

Dale

---

Benjamin van der Veen December 16, 2011 4:48 AM

If Moncai is not providing any kind of financial support I would prefer that it remain a community project. Without funding or other material contribution I don't see a case for IP transfer.

But perhaps I'm missing something?

On Dec 16, 2011, at 1:36 AM, Tomas Roos <ptoma...@gmail.com> wrote:

---

Tomas Roos December 16, 2011 4:36 AM

So guys, has there been any progress yet how we want to continue this?

Does everyone think that there is a good deal that Dale/Moncai is a owner/maintainer of this project?

I'll be happy to help out with this.

Shall we take a decision to be able to move forward.

Best regards,

Tomas Roos

---

Benjamin van der Veen December 12, 2011 7:35 PM

[Benjamin van der Veen]

Dale,

Thanks for the clarification. Thinking about this carefully I would prefer to keep it as a community project for the time being. When Moncai has resources to dedicate to the Kayak project in terms of paid developer-hours we should talk about this again. If you personally would be interested in to contributing/maintaining though that would be awesome. 

Thanks,

Benjamin

[Benjamin van der Veen]

Actually, strike that, reverse it. Everyone else who has spoken up so far thinks it's a good idea, so it's fine with me.

[Simon Cropp]

Why cant Moncai employees be granted commit rights but the ownership still stay with the community?

This way Moncai steer the project and manage contributions.

What value is there in "ownership being transferred to Moncai"?

Would it not be better if the ownership was moved to something like the outercurve foundation? http://www.outercurve.org/Participate#Assigning_a_project

[Tomas Roos]

Well one thing about open sources projects is often that they aren't bussiness driven. In the sense that they must include contributions which gain a certain company.

I'm not saying that Moncai is the wrong owner here I'm just saying that there can be conflicts.

If I look back at the FubuMVC project which i think is pretty successful. It has contributions from dovetail (the founder) but all interactions is taken in a community.

In other words, there is never a dovetail mentioned in any of the progress of the framework. 

And I really think it should be the equal for Kayak. A OSS should not be considered with a brand.

Just my thoughts.

Tomas

[Dale Ragan]

I've seen plenty of successful OSS projects that are maintained by company's and individuals.  A majority of the Ruby OSS projects are business driven and most of them are successful OSS projects in that ecosystem.  In this case Moncai would just be the maintainer and the license would not change.  It will still be a community driven project and I want people to feel that Moncai is a part of community.  We do not have any ulterior motives for taking over the project.  An OSS project comes down to the license and in this case the license will not change, it will remain MIT and the community will drive the progress.

With that said, to me it doesn't matter either way.  I'd be happy to take it over as an individual as well, if that's what the community rather see.  I just think that Moncai is a better  fit to take it over.

Cheers,

Dale

---

Tomas Roos Monday, December 19, 2011 3:56 AM

Well one thing about open sources projects is often that they aren't bussiness driven. In the sense that they must include contributions which gain a certain company.

I'm not saying that Moncai is the wrong owner here I'm just saying that there can be conflicts.

If I look back at the FubuMVC project which i think is pretty successful. It has contributions from dovetail (the founder) but all interactions is taken in a community.

In other words, there is never a dovetail mentioned in any of the progress of the framework. 

And I really think it should be the equal for Kayak. A OSS should not be considered with a brand.

Just my thoughts.

Tomas

---

Simon Cropp Sunday, December 18, 2011 6:33 PM

Why cant Moncai employees be granted commit rights but the ownership still stay with the community?

This way Moncai steer the project and manage contributions.

What value is there in "ownership being transferred to Moncai"?

Would it not be better if the ownership was moved to something like the outercurve foundation? http://www.outercurve.org/Participate#Assigning_a_project

---

Benjamin van der Veen Sunday, December 18, 2011 4:02 PM

Actually, strike that, reverse it. Everyone else who has spoken up so far thinks it's a good idea, so it's fine with me.

---

Benjamin van der Veen Sunday, December 18, 2011 3:50 PM

Dale,

Thanks for the clarification. Thinking about this carefully I would prefer to keep it as a community project for the time being. When Moncai has resources to dedicate to the Kayak project in terms of paid developer-hours we should talk about this again. If you personally would be interested in to contributing/maintaining though that would be awesome. 

Thanks,

Benjamin

---

Dale Ragan Monday, December 12, 2011 8:53 PM

Hey Ben and Louis,

[Madhulika]

Has there been any progress in this matter? Is it possible to get an update/comment on the future of Kayak - its ownership and maintenance.

Regards,

Madhu.

[cci...@gmail.com]

I would like to about that too. Some guys have shown interest in carrying Kayak's torch. If there is no response from the current maintainers, a fork may be a good idea.