That's a fair assumption and accurate for a lot of the bindings. It is true that there are a lot of bindings for ZeroMQ and many were weekend projects for a single project. However it's normal and expected in a large community. To treat that as significant is like saying, "I find a lot of abandoned HTTP server projects, so this 'Web' thingy sure looks doubtful."
Comments
The library API hasn't changed much in the past 2 years, so why would you expect the bindings to change? Just for the hell of it?
The latest release (version 4) has added a few new functions, so all of the bindings are undergoing some minor revision now to support the new calls.
For me, if there hasn't been activity for several years and I can't find it being widely used then I assume it abandoned.
That's a fair assumption and accurate for a lot of the bindings. It is true that there are a lot of bindings for ZeroMQ and many were weekend projects for a single project. However it's normal and expected in a large community. To treat that as significant is like saying, "I find a lot of abandoned HTTP server projects, so this 'Web' thingy sure looks doubtful."
For me, if there hasn't been any activity for several years yet it's still commonly used, I assume it's stable.
i find that there are at least a couple dozen issues/defects that haven't been addressed, and it doesn't seem like they're going to be