On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:17 AM, OmarShariffDontLikeIt <[email protected]> wrote: > It's my understanding that the current 1.x version of Beanstalk will > not implement changes to the beanstalk protocol.
The 1.x series won't make *incompatible* changes, but other changes are fine. For our purposes, a change is compatible if we can expect existing clients to continue to work as designed. Some examples of protocol changes that have happened since 1.0: - add a unique id and hostname to stats output - new command: kick-job - allow underscore in tube names > I'm sure everyone has > their pet features they would love adding to beanstalk (my personal > ones are Atomic Move between Tubes (https://github.com/kr/beanstalkd/ > issues/170) and Clear Tube Command (https://github.com/kr/beanstalkd/ > issues/25)). Most of the outstanding features in the issue tracker can comfortably be implemented in a compatible way, including the two you listed. I'd love to see them go in. Most of these features require some design work as well as implementation. I'm happy to collaborate on design issues, even though I haven't had time lately to work on implementation for new beanstalkd features. Most of my beanstalkd time in recent months has been spent fixing important bugs as they arise. That, along with some janitorial work in the code, continues to be my priority. Fortunately, the rate of new bugs being reported has been slowing down lately (even as beanstalkd gets more popular). And I'm happy to merge in new features even when I'm personally focused on code cleanup and bug fixing. If you want to see a new feature go in, the most effective first step is to propose a design for the feature that's compatible with the current protocol. It can happen here on the mailing list or on the issue tracker; the mailing list will reach a wider audience. These designs usually take the form of draft changes to the protocol spec and some examples of use. Once we agree on a design, it's much easier for someone to come along and implement it. (And if you want to go ahead and implement it yourself, so much the better!) > My question is what is the current roadmap for Beanstalk 2.0? I'd like > to know if these or any other features/issues will be addressed and > when. I have no plans for a version 2 right now. A few things have come up that can't really be done easily without breaking compatibility, but none of them are important enough to justify that large cost. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "beanstalk-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
