3 ms·

That isn’t necessarily bad. Ability to engage community in any form is important, and it helps to know they are serious to spend time and effort building out th

That isn’t necessarily bad. Ability to engage community in any form is important, and it helps to know they are serious to spend time and effort building out the network. People don’t buy IBM or Microsoft because they are the best, it is because of their commitment to support and maintain the product. It is similar with GitHub projects A good chunk of open source comes from corporate support directly, whether old school IBM or Facebook /google of the world. Companies influence what gets developed when, even kernel development is largely corporate funded. social network motives seem a bit more benign than say how oracle runs MySQL

goodpoint 5y ago
> Ability to engage community in any form is important When projects are riding the hype wave and getting popularized by reddit or HN it's not a proof of commitment. On the contrary, it takes more commitment to maintain a project that is not hype-driven. There's already too much churn and focusing developer's effort on developing the hot new thing of the week to be github-famous is harmful.
- manquer 5y ago
  Not every project is covered in HN/reddit. Social media impact is not feasible for every project. Some distortion shouldn't mean discard it for all projects. Staring on GitHub is slightly higher effort than say to like on Twitter/Instagram etc. There are plenty of projects that I have used after seeing here, and say opened few issues or even made a MR or two. Riding the social media wave is first step to getting users, issue responsiveness, project maturity all make a difference. 1000 star, 100 use , 10 create issues, 1 contributes. More eye balls in general can improve project quality. The maintainers have to be responsive yes, but that really is visible only with more exposure.