4 ms·

> We also need to bury the idea that any developer who submits an issue or pull request is automatically entitled to the attention of a maintainer. > The messa

> We also need to bury the idea that any developer who submits an issue or pull request is automatically entitled to the attention of a maintainer. > The message to users should be “do whatever you want with the code, but pay us for our time if you want to influence the project’s future.” So, for me, this goes against the reasons I decide to give my personal time to the community. For me, creating an open source project is a contract with the community, and part of that contract is to assist members of this community that might require features or have issues. Statements such as the ones quoted above go wholeheartedly against my idea of an open source community, and I have a feeling most of the open source community shares this sentiment. Breaking this contract would be, for me, a cease and desist of the project. For me, it is very simple, if a personal project is stagnated, that’s acceptable as no one owes anyone here anything. If a company’s open source projects go stagnant, but the company continues to boast how pro-OSS they are, it is a cardinal sin, as they have broken this contract with their users. This may be a naive look, but I don’t think a company should be able to have it both ways—boast about its OSS projects, lure people in and then ignore them and move on to their next PR OSS project. Donations are a different proposition than the suggestions in the article, and should definitely be encouraged.

hartator 9y ago
The issue is donations don't work even if you have a large user base.
- notamy 9y ago
  This this this. If you provide a service for free, the vast majority of your user base will never care about giving you money, and will just stop using your service and find another one if you try to start charging them for it instead of keeping it free. One of my side-projects has ended up here and it's been a huge pain to deal with.
  - xfer 9y ago
    We are not talking about a service here, we are talking about OSS codebase and in my experience it does work.
    - hartator 9y ago
      What's your experience?
      - xfer 9y ago
        In my experience, i donate to projects, which i use often/or build upon.
        jpttsn 9y ago
        That's nice of you. Is it enough to keep the projects alive?
        dom0 9y ago
        My data point would be Borg Backup, which, if you were to consider Bountysource to be payment for development, is under-financed by perhaps a factor of 40. 80+ % of funding came from three organizations. And what I've heard from other maintainers is that Borg seems to do comparatively well. So no, if you think in terms of payment, donations do not work in the open source ecosystem.
    - notamy 9y ago
      > We are not talking about a service here, we are talking about OSS codebase IMVHO, these are the same thing for the purpose of this discussion -- providing something to others, free of charge. > and in my experience it does work. Good for you (no sarcasm meant). But sadly this doesn't really seem to 'scale' that well.
hasenj 9y ago
That's a strange view of open source that borders on communism. You don't have any duties or obligation towards any individual to assist them with their issues. The only obligations you have is to be honest about the project. For example, if you know that the project is not written with security in mind, you must announce the fact, so that people don't go using the project assuming you took care of all potential exploits. Beyond that, you have no obligations towards anyone. Quite the opposite. You've already done your part. You donated the product of your effort for free. The obligation is on people who use your product. If they want you to care of their issues, they are obliged to give something back in return. At the very least, appreciation.
- sorokod 9y ago
  Don't know about duty but I think everyone has a right to expect help and a right to give help. It makes for a better world where these rights are regularly exercised.
  - hasenj 9y ago
    > I think everyone has a right to expect help Of the people with whom you have formed strong social bonds, yes. Of random strangers? .. I don't think so. Unless they are bound by some sort of a contract (employees, servants, etc).
  - infodroid 9y ago
    > everyone has a right to expect help and a right to give help This might make sense when asking a stranger for directions or for someone to help with your car problem, because the relationship is 1:1. But this breaks down in contexts where scale is a factor. When assisting users of your project, the relationship is 1:many. And if the project is popular, it is unfair to expect the author to be helping so many people.
    - sorokod 9y ago
      I don't really see how 1:to many makes any difference in principle. Perhaps you were thinking of the amount of effort to help the many? As in 1:1 case it is up to the helper to decide how many resources, if any, to spend on helping. A society where the default position is that people deserve help is different from one that is based on the survival of the fittest.
jasonkester 9y ago
> creating an open source project is a contract with the community, and part of that contract is to assist members of this community I disagree. Creating an open source project is a gift to the community. Expecting further time and attention from somebody who gave you a gift, out of a sense of entitlement from having received the gift, is just being rude. Pay for my time and I'll help you with your issues. Demand my time because you're somehow my "community" and I'll just re-explain the above.
- LeoNatan25 9y ago
  That statement is made by how I view my open source projects, and thus what I expect from other open source projects. Could be that my expectations are too high, but I don’t believe so. This is not entitlement, it’s expecting a level of seriousness similar to that I am willing to give.
- remline 9y ago
  A community that hasn't established a semaphore for updating the code isn't a community. It is hard to build that with consensus instead of input from its creator. The nature of what succeeds in opensource has everything to do with whether the creator puts community work in themselves, nominates someone, or just publishes read-only code. Naturally, anyone is free to do whatever they like.. but most people seem to expect a result from their actions and publishing pure code is rarely going to have any result.
- rodorgas 9y ago
  Whether you want give support and maintain the project or just throw the code, it's important to make it clear so people can have reasonable expectations. Also if you want provide paid support, make it clear too. I've recently saw a license that make the author intentions of not giving support clear: DILLIGASPL (Do I Look Like I Give A Shit Public License)[1]. Sounds like a joke, but it's a way to show what are you up for. https://github.com/samlev/DILLIGASPL https://github.com/samlev/DILLIGASPL
thinkloop 9y ago
> creating an open source project is a contract with the community, and part of that contract is to assist members of this community that might require features or have issues. If this were strictly enforced, there would be much fewer open source projects, as not all authors would be able to meet the obligations.
- LeoNatan25 9y ago
  Then add a disclaimer that the repository is not actively maintained and is looking for maintainers. This will absolve the responsibility of the entity that can no longer sustain the project and set the expectations of visitors accordingly.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  There are some areas where fewer projects would be a good think. There is a burden of choice that can be solved by filtering for authors ready and willing to meet more requirements.

hartator 9y ago

The issue is donations don't work even if you have a large user base.

notamy 9y ago
This this this. If you provide a service for free, the vast majority of your user base will never care about giving you money, and will just stop using your service and find another one if you try to start charging them for it instead of keeping it free. One of my side-projects has ended up here and it's been a huge pain to deal with.
- xfer 9y ago
  We are not talking about a service here, we are talking about OSS codebase and in my experience it does work.
  - hartator 9y ago
    What's your experience?
    - xfer 9y ago
      In my experience, i donate to projects, which i use often/or build upon.
      - jpttsn 9y ago
        That's nice of you. Is it enough to keep the projects alive?
        dom0 9y ago
        My data point would be Borg Backup, which, if you were to consider Bountysource to be payment for development, is under-financed by perhaps a factor of 40. 80+ % of funding came from three organizations. And what I've heard from other maintainers is that Borg seems to do comparatively well. So no, if you think in terms of payment, donations do not work in the open source ecosystem.
  - notamy 9y ago
    > We are not talking about a service here, we are talking about OSS codebase IMVHO, these are the same thing for the purpose of this discussion -- providing something to others, free of charge. > and in my experience it does work. Good for you (no sarcasm meant). But sadly this doesn't really seem to 'scale' that well.

hasenj 9y ago

That's a strange view of open source that borders on communism. You don't have any duties or obligation towards any individual to assist them with their issues. The only obligations you have is to be honest about the project. For example, if you know that the project is not written with security in mind, you must announce the fact, so that people don't go using the project assuming you took care of all potential exploits. Beyond that, you have no obligations towards anyone. Quite the opposite. You've already done your part. You donated the product of your effort for free. The obligation is on people who use your product. If they want you to care of their issues, they are obliged to give something back in return. At the very least, appreciation.

sorokod 9y ago
Don't know about duty but I think everyone has a right to expect help and a right to give help. It makes for a better world where these rights are regularly exercised.
- hasenj 9y ago
  > I think everyone has a right to expect help Of the people with whom you have formed strong social bonds, yes. Of random strangers? .. I don't think so. Unless they are bound by some sort of a contract (employees, servants, etc).
- infodroid 9y ago
  > everyone has a right to expect help and a right to give help This might make sense when asking a stranger for directions or for someone to help with your car problem, because the relationship is 1:1. But this breaks down in contexts where scale is a factor. When assisting users of your project, the relationship is 1:many. And if the project is popular, it is unfair to expect the author to be helping so many people.
  - sorokod 9y ago
    I don't really see how 1:to many makes any difference in principle. Perhaps you were thinking of the amount of effort to help the many? As in 1:1 case it is up to the helper to decide how many resources, if any, to spend on helping. A society where the default position is that people deserve help is different from one that is based on the survival of the fittest.

jasonkester 9y ago

> creating an open source project is a contract with the community, and part of that contract is to assist members of this community I disagree. Creating an open source project is a gift to the community. Expecting further time and attention from somebody who gave you a gift, out of a sense of entitlement from having received the gift, is just being rude. Pay for my time and I'll help you with your issues. Demand my time because you're somehow my "community" and I'll just re-explain the above.

LeoNatan25 9y ago
That statement is made by how I view my open source projects, and thus what I expect from other open source projects. Could be that my expectations are too high, but I don’t believe so. This is not entitlement, it’s expecting a level of seriousness similar to that I am willing to give.
remline 9y ago
A community that hasn't established a semaphore for updating the code isn't a community. It is hard to build that with consensus instead of input from its creator. The nature of what succeeds in opensource has everything to do with whether the creator puts community work in themselves, nominates someone, or just publishes read-only code. Naturally, anyone is free to do whatever they like.. but most people seem to expect a result from their actions and publishing pure code is rarely going to have any result.
rodorgas 9y ago
Whether you want give support and maintain the project or just throw the code, it's important to make it clear so people can have reasonable expectations. Also if you want provide paid support, make it clear too. I've recently saw a license that make the author intentions of not giving support clear: DILLIGASPL (Do I Look Like I Give A Shit Public License)[1]. Sounds like a joke, but it's a way to show what are you up for. https://github.com/samlev/DILLIGASPL https://github.com/samlev/DILLIGASPL

thinkloop 9y ago

> creating an open source project is a contract with the community, and part of that contract is to assist members of this community that might require features or have issues. If this were strictly enforced, there would be much fewer open source projects, as not all authors would be able to meet the obligations.

LeoNatan25 9y ago
Then add a disclaimer that the repository is not actively maintained and is looking for maintainers. This will absolve the responsibility of the entity that can no longer sustain the project and set the expectations of visitors accordingly.
Chris2048 9y ago
There are some areas where fewer projects would be a good think. There is a burden of choice that can be solved by filtering for authors ready and willing to meet more requirements.