[META] fork / upstream maintenance discussion

[cspotcode]

In NagRock/issues/212

There is discussion about adding maintainers to the original ts-mockito project.

I still hope the author, NagRock, is able to add maintainers. Barring that, we may want to collaborate on this fork: https://npmjs.com/package/@johanblumenberg/ts-mockito

I also have access to the @TypeStrong org, and we can consider moving the project there.

---

Other links:

This fork needs passing tests, being discussed in #2

[LironHazan]

All tests are passing now, the node version on git workflow was updated to v14.15.5
Future improvements IMO:

• Configure prettier + eslint instead of tslint, we can also
• Can try to get a better score --> https://snyk.io/advisor/npm-package/ts-mockito seek for vulnerabilities and resolve them, improve the documentation etc..

[LironHazan]

Should open a PR for merging #194
Fixed problem with a mock resolving a mocked value with Promises by @jlkeesey
Seems there are 2 discussions around it:
#191
#219
The PR was approved but never merged
@cspotcode what is the acceptable approach of porting PR's opened for the original repo into the forked repo?
Not sure it's possible to access the #194 commits from the forked repo, will just copying and leaving a comment with the issue id near the fix be OK?

[cspotcode]

Not sure it's possible to access the NagRock#194 commits from the forked repo, will just copying and leaving a comment with the issue id near the fix be OK?

The pull request creation UI should allow creating a pull request from any branch to any branch. Once I pick the correct forks and branches in the dropdowns, it appears to show me the correct commits.

[cspotcode]

I created PR #5 for this.

[LironHazan]

@cspotcode awesome! thanks I'll try doing that myself with another PR

[LironHazan]

Ported a feature PR #140 mock free functions

[LironHazan]

Ported #139 Matcher types

[cspotcode]

I noticed that the johanblumenberg README has a list of features it adds which are not in the upstream library:
https://github.com/johanblumenberg/ts-mockito#johanblumenbergts-mockito

Maybe we can try to port all of those features.

[cspotcode]

I sent a support ticket to npm support requesting a transfer of the @TypeStrong scope. If we want, and if they approve the transfer, we can publish ts-mockito under the @typestrong/ts-mockito scope.

[LironHazan]

@cspotcode I know I already opened PR's for porting features from @johanblumenberg but come to think of it after reading the latest comments on the maintenance thread I realized that maybe it would be better to resolve un-addressed "pains" - issues first and have a clear agenda of how it would be maintained outside of the original repo in case the author wouldn't intend to merge the fork into the original repo, I understand that most of the participants of the thread would like to see the original repo maintained but I have a lack of faith in personal repos in situation like those and IMO a heavily used project should have a community with a clear code of conduct, agenda, skilled developers willing to contribute - saying this carefully, as I do respect the work that was done by the author and others, I just feel the thread is moving in circles..
If I'll see we're making a progress with @typestrong/ts-mockito I'll start using that..

[cspotcode]

I like moving to TypeStrong. Github will let me transfer this repository to TypeStrong today. Is there more to discuss, or are we ready to do that right now?

[LironHazan]

@cspotcode Let's rock \m/

[cspotcode]

Transfer complete. You should still have full access. If the permissions got dropped for some reason, let me know and I'll be sure to fix it.