3 ms·
This is a large gap in the 'democratic', some might say 'chaotic' nature of open source. Where anyone can fork something, or just not feel like supporting anym
by FrustratedMonky 3y ago
This is a large gap in the 'democratic', some might say 'chaotic' nature of open source. Where anyone can fork something, or just not feel like supporting anymore. It seems like the best projects have some small group, or one person, in control.
Linux itself, would it have been as successful if Linus hadn't maintained dictatorship?
Or, maybe it is that every project needs some 'motive force' driving it. And the larger the committee in control, the more it diffuses.
- shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y agoLinux is a great example of a large project that works well _because_ many people have been delegated control. Here's a list of all the current subsystem maintainers: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoI think this might be agreeing with what I was getting at. Each section is assigned to one or two people to own it. To be responsible for that one thing. It is a large project, so splitting it up is needed. But there are clear lines of control. I think what original post was about, was Rust doesn't have these clear lines.