While I somewhat agree with you, I'd argue that this not the original understanding of OSS. The idea behind OSS (at least its' amateurish kind) has always been

While I somewhat agree with you, I'd argue that this not the original understanding of OSS. The idea behind OSS (at least its' amateurish kind) has always been very simple and straight-forward: if you have something to share, just do it. All this worrying about "users" and liabilities is symptomatic of a paradigm shift, which happened, when OSS has become a key part of big corps' business strategy and marketing. Also to a lesser extent it's a consequence of the OSS being seen as a way to market yourself as a developer and steer your career, which led to Github being flooded with unusable and unfinished stuff. So while it's true that good documentation is probably crucial for the project to become popular among the wider audience nowadays (or even to have a chance of being discovered by anyone), the absence of documentation is in no way an argument against telling fellow engineers about your work. We can figure things out, it's a part of the job :)