> What you want most of all is to have more projects that maintain themselves. You try to follow all the best practices: you have a CONTRIBUTING.md and a code o

> What you want most of all is to have more projects that maintain themselves. You try to follow all the best practices: you have a CONTRIBUTING.md and a code of conduct, you enthusiastically hand out owner privileges to anyone who submits a high-quality PR. I've helped out on other people's projects a lot in the past - enough to be given write access which I guess is what this guy means by owner privileges. I walked away as soon as I stopped being interested in contributing, with no regrets, even though I could see the project needed help and I had become an expert in it. Why? Because I was not an owner. The project still has the other guy's name on it and if it's successful all the recognition goes to him. So, while I feel a lot of sympathy for what has been written here and even have experienced some of it myself (the huge list of GitHub notifications especially resonates), I feel it's missing something important: if you really want to get people to become co-owners of your open source project,you need to give up control. Take your name off the front. Create a Github organization and move the project there. Give people actual control rather than pretend ownership that you can take back on a whim. Remove your ego and your name from your OSS projects and start to think of providing them as a service, start to treat long term contributors as equal teammates and you'll have a much better chance of creating projects that sustain themselves. On the other hand, if you're determined to keep your name on the front of the tin, well, isn't it fair that you do most of the work too? After all you're not paying anyone else for their contributions.