4 ms·
The thing is, people want their new project to get popular, because it validates them and is great portfolio and is motivating to work on, but you can't just st
by dustingetz 11y ago
The thing is, people want their new project to get popular, because it validates them and is great portfolio and is motivating to work on, but you can't just stop once you have users. a lot of maintainers just quit when they got the users and used them for what they wanted. That's not very cool. So I don't think the project maturity is so important but rather that the project maturity not go backwards. If you're promoting your stuff on social media, positioning your work to be used by beginners, it needs to be maintained at that level until the users move on. I'm not aiming at anyone in particular right now, im just saying as a thought experiment, what if you make some great thing library and everybody loves it then a year later some idea gets back ported from Elm or ClojureScript and now someone else's stuff is exploding. Are you gonna move to the shiny thing and burn the people who believed in you? It's an impossible choice. I think a lot of people are gonna get burned on this in the next two years and JavaScript world will move back towards frameworks rather than libraries.
- sheepmullet 11y ago> I think a lot of people are gonna get burned on this in the next two years and JavaScript world will move back towards frameworks rather than libraries. I don't think so. Most of the companies I have worked at have the resources and expertise to maintain a couple of open-source libraries if the authors move along to greener pastures. On the other hand only very large companies have the ability to maintain abandoned frameworks. It is also a lot simpler to change libraries than it is to change frameworks.