4 ms·

I don't think the issue is as much about design as it is about seriousness. Having a homepage for the project, spending some time or money on design and reachi

I don't think the issue is as much about design as it is about seriousness. Having a homepage for the project, spending some time or money on design and reaching out to the community shows you're committed to the project which will get others to commit. That's the best insurance a user can get against the project being completely abandoned one day. As someone whose tried to use open source whenever possible I can tell you there's no feeling worse than using an open source component that's been left for dead

orangecat 16y ago
I can tell you there's no feeling worse than using an open source component that's been left for dead I'd say using a commercial component that's been left for dead is much worse.
shortlived 16y ago
> I don't think the issue is as much about design as it is about seriousness. You get what you pay for. And your best insurance against the project being completely abandoned is to have the source code.
dhimes 16y ago
It's a good list for "What you should be doing to call attention to your open-source project (when it's ready for prime-time)." The current title reads like: "this is what you owe me if you want me to look at you." Well, ok, but I don't feel that way. I'll use smaller, humbler projects. But I do agree that in doing so I must be prepared for the day that it is no longer updated and the bugs aren't being fixed. I'd certainly feel more comfortable with projects that met most of the lists' criteria, and would be willing to bet more on them for the long haul. But I would still use smaller projects. Some things (couchdb) seem riskier than others (php), and some very small projects (php-on-couch) seem quite risky indeed. However, I could pick up and go if php-on-couch stalled, I could probably manage if couchdb stalled, but I would be in trouble if php did.

orangecat 16y ago

I can tell you there's no feeling worse than using an open source component that's been left for dead I'd say using a commercial component that's been left for dead is much worse.

shortlived 16y ago

> I don't think the issue is as much about design as it is about seriousness. You get what you pay for. And your best insurance against the project being completely abandoned is to have the source code.

dhimes 16y ago

It's a good list for "What you should be doing to call attention to your open-source project (when it's ready for prime-time)." The current title reads like: "this is what you owe me if you want me to look at you." Well, ok, but I don't feel that way. I'll use smaller, humbler projects. But I do agree that in doing so I must be prepared for the day that it is no longer updated and the bugs aren't being fixed. I'd certainly feel more comfortable with projects that met most of the lists' criteria, and would be willing to bet more on them for the long haul. But I would still use smaller projects. Some things (couchdb) seem riskier than others (php), and some very small projects (php-on-couch) seem quite risky indeed. However, I could pick up and go if php-on-couch stalled, I could probably manage if couchdb stalled, but I would be in trouble if php did.