6 ms·

> The expectation that software libraries or frameworks should break every few months is disturbing I think it is more that recent updates are used as a proxy

by thayne 4y ago

> The expectation that software libraries or frameworks should break every few months is disturbing I think it is more that recent updates are used as a proxy for determining if the developer still cares about the project. The problem is it is hard to distinguish between a project that has been abandoned, and a project that is feature complete and hasn't had any bugs reported in a while. Although, if you assume that any software is free of bugs, and that at least some users will report bugs, if there is low activity, that suggests that either it isn't well maintained, or there isn't a critical mass of users to find and report those bugs. But then, higher quality software will require a higher number of users to hit that critical mass so it doesn't give you that much information unless you also know how good the software is.

maxloh 4y ago
Maintainer's activity in GitHub issue is also a good metric.
- ungamedplayer 4y ago
  I disagree. I have some common lisp libraries that have not been touched in years and the majority of my day to day is in company git. I imagine that I am not the only one.
  - simfree 4y ago
    If your using a non-github platform without mirroring the repository, your pretty SoL for getting those green squares of activity to reflect your actual activity.
    - samarthr1 4y ago
      SoL?
      - bussierem 4y ago
        Shit outta luck
      - gsinclair 4y ago
        Shit outta luck.
    - ungamedplayer 4y ago
      Is that really a measure of activity, because i'm 90% sure i saw tools to fake that into some kind of image. Edit: https://github.com/blaise-io/contribution https://github.com/blaise-io/contribution For example.. I guess that maybe gaming the system really is required if thats a 'good measure'.
    - themoonisachees 4y ago
      Why should i care about the green squares (which can be faked anyway)? This feels like microsoft propaganda to get me to put everything on github for no good reason, especially considering that if he's pushing to a company git that company probably doesn't want it on the public internet.
  - mvdwoord 4y ago
    First thing I was taught when I was introduced to a CL codebase/project.. "Library/repository activity has little to do with usability, or quality. Some things are more or less finished and correct."
- bandrami 4y ago
  I have code running today for which my last commit (in CVS!) was in 2002. Some software just does what it is supposed to and doesn't need to change, and this is OK, and I have no idea why this fact infuriates some people.
  - coldacid 4y ago
    Because people these days tend to have the attention span of squirrels.
  - alephu5 4y ago
    I wouldn't be surprised if most software in the world has been chugging along unchanged for decades. I suspect future historians in 1000 years will find pieces of ancient code copied around unchanged for centuries.
atoav 4y ago
I mean one way to so it would be to just write: I consider this project complete and have it running ever since
- thayne 4y ago
  Well, does that mean "i will never touch this again" or "I won't add any new features, but I will fix bugs"? If the former, I probably don't want to use it. If the latter, I might consider it, depending on what it does, and if it has the features I need, but then, again, how do I know if they are still watching it since they posted that. And there is also the state of "it has all the features I need, but I'd be open to adding a new feature if someone else shows a compelling use case for it."
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - atoav 4y ago
    I mean it depends on the kind of project right? What would be catastrophic for a web framework could be totally normal for a command line tool. I mean when was the last commit to some of the GNU utils we use every day? If your module provides math functions or implements some protocoll chances are those underlying things are not going to change etc. I use a ton of tools I wrote myself and haven't had to touch in years except for the occasional dependency update.
    - vbezhenar 4y ago
      > when was the last commit to some of the GNU utils we use every day? 17 hours ago: https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commits/master https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commits/master
      - atoav 4y ago
        Sure, because the repo contains a ton of tools. Yet another advantage of the monorepo: if everything is in one repo nobody will notice that you haven't touched that one part of the code since you wrote it. Or let's phrase it differently: there will always be a part of the code that you do not have to touch for decades if all goes well. And if that part sits in a seperate repo, is it abandoned or just finished?
moss2 4y ago
...what? What does it matter if the developer still cares about the project? It isn't crashing and no new features are needed. If it did then the project wouldn't be complete. We're not talking about some early access half broken NPM package here, the blog specifically talks about a completed product.
- Double_a_92 4y ago
  What if you do find a critical bug after you started using it, and there is no one around that can help you with it?
  - liotier 4y ago
    When you find no one paying for maintainance, then congratulations: you are the maintainer !
    - zmmmmm 4y ago
      Agreed and upvote but it becomes a problem if the owner is unresponsive but still holding the main repository, domains, package repositories etc. Forking is possible but a very complicated, messy, hostile path and also a lot more work than just contributing a patch.
      - selfhoster11 4y ago
        If you want an SLA on support, then pay for support. It's literally that simple.
        zmmmmm 4y ago
        This is a fantasy ... go offer some open source maintainer some money to implement something they don't want or care about and come back and tell us if it was simple. It may be in some cases where they are actively looking for that kind of work, but more than likely they will have no interest.
justaj 4y ago
> The problem is it is hard to distinguish between a project that has been abandoned, and a project that is feature complete and hasn't had any bugs reported in a while. Usually I browse the issues / bug reports page and see if there are any breaking bugs that aren't getting much attention. If there are, then that's one more data point that the project might be abandoned.
Xeoncross 4y ago
Speaking to GitHub specifically: 1) The owners sometimes archive the project or write in the readme: complete, no more features will be accepted. 2) You can look at the number of open issues. A project with X stars/used-by/forks that hasn't been updated in 8 months and has zero open issues is probably stable.

by thayne 4y ago

maxloh 4y ago

Maintainer's activity in GitHub issue is also a good metric.

ungamedplayer 4y ago
I disagree. I have some common lisp libraries that have not been touched in years and the majority of my day to day is in company git. I imagine that I am not the only one.
- simfree 4y ago
  If your using a non-github platform without mirroring the repository, your pretty SoL for getting those green squares of activity to reflect your actual activity.
  - samarthr1 4y ago
    SoL?
    - bussierem 4y ago
      Shit outta luck
    - gsinclair 4y ago
      Shit outta luck.
  - ungamedplayer 4y ago
    Is that really a measure of activity, because i'm 90% sure i saw tools to fake that into some kind of image. Edit: https://github.com/blaise-io/contribution https://github.com/blaise-io/contribution For example.. I guess that maybe gaming the system really is required if thats a 'good measure'.
  - themoonisachees 4y ago
    Why should i care about the green squares (which can be faked anyway)? This feels like microsoft propaganda to get me to put everything on github for no good reason, especially considering that if he's pushing to a company git that company probably doesn't want it on the public internet.
- mvdwoord 4y ago
  First thing I was taught when I was introduced to a CL codebase/project.. "Library/repository activity has little to do with usability, or quality. Some things are more or less finished and correct."
bandrami 4y ago
I have code running today for which my last commit (in CVS!) was in 2002. Some software just does what it is supposed to and doesn't need to change, and this is OK, and I have no idea why this fact infuriates some people.
- coldacid 4y ago
  Because people these days tend to have the attention span of squirrels.
- alephu5 4y ago
  I wouldn't be surprised if most software in the world has been chugging along unchanged for decades. I suspect future historians in 1000 years will find pieces of ancient code copied around unchanged for centuries.

atoav 4y ago

I mean one way to so it would be to just write: I consider this project complete and have it running ever since

thayne 4y ago
Well, does that mean "i will never touch this again" or "I won't add any new features, but I will fix bugs"? If the former, I probably don't want to use it. If the latter, I might consider it, depending on what it does, and if it has the features I need, but then, again, how do I know if they are still watching it since they posted that. And there is also the state of "it has all the features I need, but I'd be open to adding a new feature if someone else shows a compelling use case for it."
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- atoav 4y ago
  I mean it depends on the kind of project right? What would be catastrophic for a web framework could be totally normal for a command line tool. I mean when was the last commit to some of the GNU utils we use every day? If your module provides math functions or implements some protocoll chances are those underlying things are not going to change etc. I use a ton of tools I wrote myself and haven't had to touch in years except for the occasional dependency update.
  - vbezhenar 4y ago
    > when was the last commit to some of the GNU utils we use every day? 17 hours ago: https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commits/master https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commits/master
    - atoav 4y ago
      Sure, because the repo contains a ton of tools. Yet another advantage of the monorepo: if everything is in one repo nobody will notice that you haven't touched that one part of the code since you wrote it. Or let's phrase it differently: there will always be a part of the code that you do not have to touch for decades if all goes well. And if that part sits in a seperate repo, is it abandoned or just finished?

moss2 4y ago

...what? What does it matter if the developer still cares about the project? It isn't crashing and no new features are needed. If it did then the project wouldn't be complete. We're not talking about some early access half broken NPM package here, the blog specifically talks about a completed product.

Double_a_92 4y ago
What if you do find a critical bug after you started using it, and there is no one around that can help you with it?
- liotier 4y ago
  When you find no one paying for maintainance, then congratulations: you are the maintainer !
  - zmmmmm 4y ago
    Agreed and upvote but it becomes a problem if the owner is unresponsive but still holding the main repository, domains, package repositories etc. Forking is possible but a very complicated, messy, hostile path and also a lot more work than just contributing a patch.
    - selfhoster11 4y ago
      If you want an SLA on support, then pay for support. It's literally that simple.
      - zmmmmm 4y ago
        This is a fantasy ... go offer some open source maintainer some money to implement something they don't want or care about and come back and tell us if it was simple. It may be in some cases where they are actively looking for that kind of work, but more than likely they will have no interest.

justaj 4y ago

> The problem is it is hard to distinguish between a project that has been abandoned, and a project that is feature complete and hasn't had any bugs reported in a while. Usually I browse the issues / bug reports page and see if there are any breaking bugs that aren't getting much attention. If there are, then that's one more data point that the project might be abandoned.

Xeoncross 4y ago

Speaking to GitHub specifically: 1) The owners sometimes archive the project or write in the readme: complete, no more features will be accepted. 2) You can look at the number of open issues. A project with X stars/used-by/forks that hasn't been updated in 8 months and has zero open issues is probably stable.