3 ms·

It's a problem for other communities, like Python. I read a blog post recently from a well known python dev where he talks about explicitly cultivating "fame" a

It's a problem for other communities, like Python. I read a blog post recently from a well known python dev where he talks about explicitly cultivating "fame" around his open source tools. My experience, as one who has tried to promote my own tools, is that literally nothing good will come of it for the community as a whole. It's a bad practice in my opinion. For example: https://github.com/pypa/pipenv/issues/2228 https://github.com/pypa/pipenv/issues/2228

ayrx 8y ago
What incentives would a someone have to invest a considerable amount of time in releasing and maintaining an open source project if they can't even use that to promote themselves?
- boomlinde 8y ago
  Maybe they have a genuine interest in the problem they're addressing, and in solving it. I work on some open source projects that gain little attention from others but have great utility to me, personally.
  - ayrx 8y ago
    It's a nice sentiment but that's how you end up with abandoned, low quality projects that no one uses. Or even worse - abandoned, low quality projects that half the Internet relies on.
    - lainga 8y ago
      Thus the boot message on all Linux machines: "Made with <3 and (coffee emoji) by Linus Torvalds"
    - boomlinde 8y ago
      > It's a nice sentiment but that's how you end up with abandoned, low quality projects that no one uses. How is it a bad thing that a piece of software that no one uses is abandoned by its developers? Or should i put it like this: how is it bad that no one uses a piece of software that has been abandoned by its developers? Whichever way you prefer to put it. > Or even worse - abandoned, low quality projects that half the Internet relies on. It's not my responsibility to make sure that my software is used for things that it is useful for. In fact, I typically use a license where I deny responsibility for fitness for a particular purpose, like MIT or GPL, exactly because it isn't and shouldn't be my problem. I think this should be accounted for when deciding whether to use open source software in your project. Of course, with Javascript projects I often end up looking at shitty dependencies because some popular library depends on some slightly less popular library which depends on a brain fart someone put on github 10 years ago and never touched since despite stale, open issues. This is a problem with the community's attitude towards dependencies, not with what software I make available for others to use. Besides, a low quality project that half of the internet relies on doesn't really need any additional promotion or advertisement, does it?

ayrx 8y ago

What incentives would a someone have to invest a considerable amount of time in releasing and maintaining an open source project if they can't even use that to promote themselves?

boomlinde 8y ago
Maybe they have a genuine interest in the problem they're addressing, and in solving it. I work on some open source projects that gain little attention from others but have great utility to me, personally.
- ayrx 8y ago
  It's a nice sentiment but that's how you end up with abandoned, low quality projects that no one uses. Or even worse - abandoned, low quality projects that half the Internet relies on.
  - lainga 8y ago
    Thus the boot message on all Linux machines: "Made with <3 and (coffee emoji) by Linus Torvalds"
  - boomlinde 8y ago
    > It's a nice sentiment but that's how you end up with abandoned, low quality projects that no one uses. How is it a bad thing that a piece of software that no one uses is abandoned by its developers? Or should i put it like this: how is it bad that no one uses a piece of software that has been abandoned by its developers? Whichever way you prefer to put it. > Or even worse - abandoned, low quality projects that half the Internet relies on. It's not my responsibility to make sure that my software is used for things that it is useful for. In fact, I typically use a license where I deny responsibility for fitness for a particular purpose, like MIT or GPL, exactly because it isn't and shouldn't be my problem. I think this should be accounted for when deciding whether to use open source software in your project. Of course, with Javascript projects I often end up looking at shitty dependencies because some popular library depends on some slightly less popular library which depends on a brain fart someone put on github 10 years ago and never touched since despite stale, open issues. This is a problem with the community's attitude towards dependencies, not with what software I make available for others to use. Besides, a low quality project that half of the internet relies on doesn't really need any additional promotion or advertisement, does it?