trunk is a great piece of software! When I started with Rust on the frontend, the webpack
trunk showed up, and it was the tool I was hoping for.
Unfortunately, it seems that the development of trunk came to a halt too. Now what?
Trunk is a nice, little tool that orchestrates the build of a Rust/WebAssembly based build for the frontend (aka web browser). Compared to
webpack, it performs a similar job, but in a much more focused way. Some might find this limiting, but it makes the whole process much less complicated.
In times of the
wasm-pack plugin, there were a lot of issues around the
webpack moved on, the plugin didn’t follow up, and the whole integration was there, but far from ideal.
Trunk changed that situation completely. It was a “rust first” tool, rather than an afterthought. But it was also much more effort than “just” having a plugin for the existing toolchain of webpack. Anthony Dodd, the main author of trunk, did an amazing job.
The build up
So, what’s the issue? Like any other software, trunk has a few issues, some missing features, and some things which need maintenance over time. And people actually raised issues and came up with PRs. But the rate at which they got merged and feedback was given, wasn’t great.
A more important issue was the one that piled up change events in the build trigger queue. As I am a daily user of trunk, and know some Rust, I thought I’d fix this issue. I contributed to trunk before, it was slow, but worked out. In this case, however, it took 4 months until I got the feedback: not this way.
Technically the fix would have worked. But I also understand the feedback. So I did re-implement the solution in the newly suggested way. After another month of no reply, I raised an issue, asking about the state of the project.
I also decided to create a fork, in order to release this single fix for the team I am working on. As I was hoping this would only be temporary, I went for the rather boring name
That got the ball rolling. I got into a bit closer contact with the
thedodd and the PR was merged. Yay!
A note on open source and the people behind projects
Maybe this is the right moment to write a few words on open source, open source projects, and the expectations towards them. Some projects may be maintained by companies, even big ones. But some projects are not. People might fix some of the problems they have with a tool, and share it wither others, in the hope that it’s as useful to them.
That doesn’t mean, however, that they offer 24/7 support, or free consulting around it. With open source, people are encouraged to contribute and contribute fixes and improvements themselves. And if everyone does that, it may grow into something bigger.
In any case, a project might still be backed by a few, or even just one, individual. And each person has a personal life. Priorities might change, and more important things might cause a shift in focus. Or maybe someone simply loses interest.
And that’s OK! It helps to communicate that fact. But in any case: IT IS OK!
After this PR was finally merged and understood the situation of the project a bit better, I wanted to help out more and groomed through the existing, open PRs, in order to get people on board rebasing them and fixing them up to get them merged too. There were a bunch of simple and small ones, quick wins.
Turns out that the change right after my PR (the cooldown), introduced a behavior that led to some weird behavior of
trunk. After a build was completed, all change events so far were discarded. This might lead to some stale state, where the content of the served frontend no longer reflects the code in the filesystem.
I started to work on a draft PR, to get some more information from people running into a similar issue on Windows, and at the same time tried to get at least one more PR from some other contributor merged.
I learned from
thedodd that he will not have much time for
trunk at the moment (and that’s ok, see above!), but also the suggestion to reach out to the other maintainers only ended in more silence. People also seemed to get frustrated with the GitHub bot closing issues due to inactivity (never a good idea IMHO).
In a case where a project gets stalled by the lack of maintainers, there’s a simple solution in the open-source world: forking the project.
Some might see this as a negative thing. Even aggressive. But I don’t think that should be the case. It’s just a point in time where people’s interest diverges. Or, like in this case, where one project becomes unresponsive, other people can pick it up, and keep it alive and useful to others.
As I already had the GitHub infrastructure in place, it was easy to rebase and continue the work.
What’s the current state?
As pushing out new releases is pretty much automated, it’s easy to add some more changes and get them out. As I groomed through open PR before, if cherry-picked some of them into trunk-ng, and released those too. There is a fix in there for race conditions while copying, or some enhancements and doc fixes.
If you have some more, please let me know, and raise an issue. I will take a look.
There’s also a new Nix package which should be available soon.
Judging from the list of issues and open PRs, there are some topics that people seem interested in. I can’t fix all of them, but maybe, where my interest overlaps, I can try. Or if you reach out to me, and it’s a small issue, that seems important to you, I might be able to take a look. Just like the Nix package, I don’t use it, but I am also eager to learn something new.
There’s one more thing I really wanted to tackle at some point, I simply was afraid a larger PR like this might get stuck. Whenever a build fails, you’re not aware of this in the front end. Wouldn’t it be great, if the front end would give you an error indication? Definitely a thing we could learn from webpack.
Ultimately, I truly hope all those changes end up in proper
trunk and the fork will no longer be necessary.
But until then, let’s get moving!