Please clarify the development status of openxlsx, particularly with reference to openxlsx2

[hedsnz]

There is an open PR, by @JanMarvin (who seems to be the maintainer of both openxlsx and openxlsx2), with a note that describes openxlsx as being unmaintained. Is it possible to please clarify the following:

• Is openxlsx indeed unmaintained? It seems there are fixes applied only two months ago.
• Should all new projects that are considering using openxlsx instead use openxlsx2 going forward?
• Is openxlsx2 backward-compatible with openxlsx, e.g., is it likely to be straightforward to migrate existing code based on openxlsx to use openxlsx2?
• Is openxlsx2 a standard fork of openxlsx, or are there fundamental changes in the API? I'm thrown off a bit by the phrase openxlsx2 is a modern reinterpretation of openxlsx, which seems to imply it's more than just a fork that is being actively maintained. But I'm not sure.

Mainly I ask because I've done some work today to get a PR together to resolve #461, because I didn't realise that openxlsx is not being actively maintained, and my existing projects use openxlsx so I didn't feel any need to switch to openxlsx2 (which has already implemented that feature).

Thanks!

[JanMarvin]

Hi @hedsnz ,

no offense, but I believe the note (in the unmerged PR) is both short and precise about the state of development of openxlsx, and I don't think this needs to be rephrased. Therefore:

• No, you read wrong. It is maintained, it just isn't actively developed. But the note in the PR isn't even merged.
• My suggestion would be to consider openxlsx2 for new projects, but ultimately the bus factor for both packages is 1 :)
• No, but there is a vignette/book chapter that explains this.
• Ditto

If you want/need MIPS in openxlsx, who's stopping you from implementing it? You can even take a look at the implementation in openxlsx2 and borrow it.

[hedsnz]

Hi @JanMarvin,

Thanks for the quick response!

The pull request states the following:

open issues are not being actively worked on and pull requests may not be checked.

That's why I opened this issue; I'm more than happy to open a PR to introduce MIPS to openxlsx, but the note implied that it might not be looked at (hence my use of the word unmaintained, which I think fits the bill for pull requests may not be checked, but I apologise if this is a mischaracterisation).

Thanks for the link to the vignette, that's really useful. I think that it would be very helpful to include a link to that vignette, as well as a short description of openxlsx2, in the openxlsx README. It seems clear that openxlsx2 is the favoured long-term implementation, so directing people to use that over openxlsx for new projects seems reasonable to me.

For example, I only heard about openxlsx2 when you linked it in #461. I initially thought "oh, that's a completely different package, why would I want to replace my existing dependency on openxlsx with this new package"? It was only after some digging that I realised that both packages are maintained by the same person. If there were some context in the openxlsx README, that would have helped to justify the switch more easily; and I would be particularly incentivised to move away from openxlsx if it is not being actively developed.

Thanks :)

[JanMarvin]

Thanks again for raising the issue. I have added a section to the README in release 4.2.8.