There are open source authors who worked hard at, and have succeeded in popularizing their libraries. They create slick marketing style webpages for their docs

There are open source authors who worked hard at, and have succeeded in popularizing their libraries. They create slick marketing style webpages for their docs, often to the detriment of it's actual usability, but certainly the eye-candy helps adoption. And they seem to spend more time in this endeavour, the popularization, of their lib, then making their docs more thorough and fixing the various issues that pop up with their lib. I have an issue with these open source authors. Because even if I personally disdain their work, and abstain from it in projects under my control, at every company I go to I either have to encounter it in use and deal with its flaws, or have to defend a codebase without it from someone joining the team and suggesting we use it. The open source authors obviously gain a benefit the more github stars their work acquire. So yeah... sorry I don't buy the 'they don't owe you nothin'. They worked and sweated to get their fucking code on my machine and then instead of fixing bugs they close issues flippantly, cherrypick examples of bad issues raised as if all issues raised were of similar calibre, and basically do a big dramatic 'le sigh' when actually confronted with the responsibility of fixing their fucking work. If this is how you feel don't beat on every door and bang the drums and say your lib is God's solution incarnate come to earth to silver bullet the problem. I should be seeking out your lib, your lib should not be seeking out my codebase.