3 ms·
> As a user, I can't think of anything more frustrating to spend hours or even days on an issue on an open source project that "welcomes" issues and contributio
by matkoniecz 4y ago
> As a user, I can't think of anything more frustrating to spend hours or even days on an issue on an open source project that "welcomes" issues and contributions and then creating a detailed GitHub Issue only for it to be responded with with author's "No" and immediately closed.
Is it a bug report? In that case I agree that it is irritating.
Is it a feature request? Then your mistake is to spend days on crafting feature request. I prefer to make simple feature request and spend more effort if it is provisionally accepted.
> It just means that users get a false sense of the tool's maintainability, reliability, etc. by looking at a "clean" issue listing only to find out that tons of issues still exist.
I look also at recently closed ones - if stalebot is present then I escape immediately.
> The response to an issue of "contributions are welcome" or "you can fork it" are inappropriate
that is entirely appropriate response, maintainers are not obligated to fix bugs (unless they are under some support contract).
> On another note, many maintainers will report how much of an open source developer they are on their resume or talks they give, when in reality their open source projects are just that, open source.
what is the problem here?
- bmitc 4y ago> > On another note, many maintainers will report how much of an open source developer they are on their resume or talks they give, when in reality their open source projects are just that, open source. > what is the problem here? My personal issue with it is that it is misleading. I feel there is a difference between "I am the maintainer for these open source projects" and "I open sourced these personal projects" if one doesn't really maintain, in a community sense, the projects. It's akin to resume padding.
- matkoniecz 4y agoOK, if someone abandons open source project and claims to be developing it then I see a problem. (though open sourcing project and not accepting PRs or even issues is fine, if it is actually maintained)
- bmitc 4y agoAgreed. I think this just revolves around clear communication and expectation setting. Just too often it is all too implicit and ad-hoc, where frustration easily brews on both sides. It's like wet towels and mildew. Lol. Don't wet them if you're not going to dry them or hang them up. (Disclaimer: I didn't heavily think through this analogy.)
- hxugufjfjf 4y agoWhether they are actually maintaining or just "padding" is quickly revealed by visiting the repositories of the developer who claims so, or? I can also claim on my resume that I am a world famous actor, but my mostly blank IMDb page will quickly tell another story.