4 ms·

> In the end, this thing spits out strings. Does it need eight maintainers, only a few of whom had commits, in low double digits? Does it need its own GitHub or

> In the end, this thing spits out strings. Does it need eight maintainers, only a few of whom had commits, in low double digits? Does it need its own GitHub org, Twitter account, and Google .dev domain? I'm pretty sure the org and multiple people are to avoid a single point of (mental) failure - quite reasonable given the project history. Also, if we really want to go that way, Google Search is also just a product that spits out strings. And a few orders of magnitude more over-engineered ;) > But in the end, I don't see anything here addressing root causes of what happened, or even speculating on what they might have been. Well, they have a larger team now, which can reasonably prevent a single person from doing that kind of damage when set up correctly. What other root cause are you looking for? Mental checkups for open-source maintainers? Redefining the "free" in free software?

kemitchell 5y ago
If what happened here was mental health, I'm not sure more people is more better, from a security standpoint. If it was strongly linked to workload and maintainers' plight, I'm not sure more scope is, either. If the harm done was time wasted and confusion incurred, I wonder about users who got burned teaming up as a group of eight. In any event, the median count of contributors to an open source project remains one. This team-up doesn't help projects != faker.js. As for scope, I haven't looked at this source in a while. But it seems the strings are still static, in the package: <https://github.com/faker-js/faker/tree/29234378807c4141588861f69421bf20b5ac635e/lib/locales https://github.com/faker-js/faker/tree/29234378807c414158886...>.