3 ms·

> As such, there exists a kind of implied social contract between the project owner and users. No, there doesn't. The "reality" is this: you are using the code

by aseipp 10y ago

> As such, there exists a kind of implied social contract between the project owner and users. No, there doesn't. The "reality" is this: you are using the code I have given out, and that's all you get from me. I also very much enjoy how you talk about your own free time, and how it's not really "free" to evaluate this stuff, and thus there's a burden etc etc -- and then conveniently turn around immediately and say "but maintainers are required to give me their time, that's part of the social contract". What kind of bullshit is this? It's always the same shit -- time and money for me (I get to reap the rewards, shitpost on your bugtracker, and complain on my blog when you make me mad), none for thee (you're required to help me). If you're so worried about your own time and your own cost savings -- go buy proprietary code. Or pay the maintainer. Then you can actually have a real contract without handwaving and appealing to non-existent "social contracts". If you want to whine about taking on risk, maybe you should also bear the burdens of that, as well as the benefits. I'm sorry that's so unfair, but maybe it could teach you something. > If the owner has other reasons for putting up the project on Github/Gitlab etc (e.g. it's their hobby project, or they want to showcase their code to potential employers), and has no intention to support it, then they should include a note in the readme that the code is not intended for production use. Problem solved. So your answer is that we should always assume this "social contract" exists with every piece of code, and thus maintainers are obligated to slave away for us unless specified otherwise? This entire post reeks of nonsense entitlement-justification. I do not owe you my free time because I posted a library on GitHub, though I may choose to give you my time. I am also free to rescind that offer at any time, and guess what -- I do not need your approval to do so (because, really, you are not that important). End of story.

enraged_camel 10y ago
>>No, there doesn't. The "reality" is this: you are using the code I have given out, and that's all you get from me. Fine, then say so on the readme file! It's not lack of updates people are worried about. It's the uncertainty that comes with not knowing whether the owner intends to continue developing it or if they have abandoned it. If you pay some attention, you'll see that's what this entire conversation is about: the owner of a popular project being the single point of failure and then going missing. >>I do not owe you my free time because I posted a library on GitHub, though I may choose to give you my time. I am also free to rescind that offer at any time, and guess what -- I do not need your approval to do so (because, really, you are not that important). End of story. Again, no one is asking for your free time. If you don't want to update the project or push fixes, fine, whatever. The only thing people are asking you to do is to transfer ownership of the project - or at least admin/maintainer rights - to someone else in a responsible manner if you decide to abandon it. You may call this "entitlement." I call it "being an adult." And frankly, get over yourself. You aren't that important either. Just because you posted a piece of shitty code on Github doesn't give you the right to act like an asshole when people come to rely on that code. Try not to let it get to your head too much, mmkay?
- inimino 10y ago
  > Fine, then say so on the readme file! Understanding that a project with a single maintainer may become unmaintained unexpectedly should be common sense. > Again, no one is asking for your free time. You literally are. Including the time and energy needed to decide whether or not to continue maintaining the project, and to hand it off in an appropriate way. > Just because you posted a piece of shitty code on Github doesn't give you the right to act like an asshole when people come to rely on that code. Is this normally the tone you take when asking people who helped you to keep helping you? Just because you randomly downloaded some code from Github and chose to rely on it doesn't mean the author owes you a damn thing. Don't like it? Fork it. That actually is how open source works.

by aseipp 10y ago

enraged_camel 10y ago

>>No, there doesn't. The "reality" is this: you are using the code I have given out, and that's all you get from me. Fine, then say so on the readme file! It's not lack of updates people are worried about. It's the uncertainty that comes with not knowing whether the owner intends to continue developing it or if they have abandoned it. If you pay some attention, you'll see that's what this entire conversation is about: the owner of a popular project being the single point of failure and then going missing. >>I do not owe you my free time because I posted a library on GitHub, though I may choose to give you my time. I am also free to rescind that offer at any time, and guess what -- I do not need your approval to do so (because, really, you are not that important). End of story. Again, no one is asking for your free time. If you don't want to update the project or push fixes, fine, whatever. The only thing people are asking you to do is to transfer ownership of the project - or at least admin/maintainer rights - to someone else in a responsible manner if you decide to abandon it. You may call this "entitlement." I call it "being an adult." And frankly, get over yourself. You aren't that important either. Just because you posted a piece of shitty code on Github doesn't give you the right to act like an asshole when people come to rely on that code. Try not to let it get to your head too much, mmkay?

inimino 10y ago
> Fine, then say so on the readme file! Understanding that a project with a single maintainer may become unmaintained unexpectedly should be common sense. > Again, no one is asking for your free time. You literally are. Including the time and energy needed to decide whether or not to continue maintaining the project, and to hand it off in an appropriate way. > Just because you posted a piece of shitty code on Github doesn't give you the right to act like an asshole when people come to rely on that code. Is this normally the tone you take when asking people who helped you to keep helping you? Just because you randomly downloaded some code from Github and chose to rely on it doesn't mean the author owes you a damn thing. Don't like it? Fork it. That actually is how open source works.