6 ms·

This is the best way to conclude a project like this, I wish more clear cut "this is the end" choices were made. An ecosystem with zombie projects isn't healthy

This is the best way to conclude a project like this, I wish more clear cut "this is the end" choices were made. An ecosystem with zombie projects isn't healthy.

stavros 3y ago
Why? I wish people would put their projects in something like https://www.codeshelter.co https://www.codeshelter.co so anyone who's interested can maintain them, instead of just killing them.
- bornfreddy 3y ago
  Do you, as the project maintainer and possibly even founder, trust these people?
  - stavros 3y ago
    The maintainers are vetted before joining, and are removed if they do something untoward, but when the choice is between killing the project or giving it to some random person, Code Shelter provides a better alternative.
    - sthlmb 3y ago
      What if they pass the joining process but then later sneak something in that goes undetected until things go boom? There are alternatives, you can fork the original project, and things will go on. As others have said too, you can just update the underlying software and there's a good chance that the wrapper itself will continue functioning, providing there are no giant breaking changes and by that point, a fork or alternative will likely have handled it.
      - stavros 3y ago
        What if there's no joining process, and they contact a maintainer directly, and peer pressure them to hand over the project, and the maintainer does, and then they sneak a backdoor in some binary test files?
        eropple 3y ago
        That scenario is exactly what PiVPN is avoiding by refusing to nominate a new maintainer and telling interested parties to fork--so what is your actual and concrete objection? Fork the project. Earn your own trust.
        stavros 3y ago
        > so what is your actual and concrete objection? This: > I wish people would put their projects in something like https://www.codeshelter.co https://www.codeshelter.co so anyone who's interested can maintain them, instead of just killing them
        eropple 3y ago
        So to me that says you want it both ways, for while I appreciate what the codeshelter folks are trying to do, it is a task that is going to turn out Sudden But Inevitable Betrayals. Instead of contacting a maintainer directly, they just look sufficiently polished that codeshelter says "yeah, sure, OK" and hands it over. Forking the project and earning your own trust really is the safe path forward.
- Narishma 3y ago
  They can still fork the project and continue maintaining it if they want. Nobody's stopping them.
- reachableceo 3y ago
  The project can be forked with a single click. That’s the beauty of GitHub.
  - Zambyte 3y ago
    That's actually the beauty of git, and any other DVCSs. It's one click to "fork" with lots of other forges as well.
  - eviks 3y ago
    Where do you click second to make all the (dozens of) contributors even be aware of your first single click?
- BossingAround 3y ago
  You can maintain it right now. Make a fork, and continue development. You might even get some shoutout from the original devs. It's all open source after all, making this repo read-only doesn't mean the project's dead if the community is vibrant enough.
  - stavros 3y ago
    The community matters. It's one thing to get control of the official websites, official packages, etc, and another to have to tell every single user "come use my fork".
    - planb 3y ago
      But this is dangerous. There are many „Jia Tans“ out there who would love to continue maintenance of those projects with the full community.
      - stavros 3y ago
        Yeah, we always knew there were. Open source can't stop existing because there are bad actors.
        sevg 3y ago
        So you're saying that if projects continue choosing to sunset without handing over the keys to the kingdom, open source will stop existing? This is simply not even close to true. Edit: I can't reply to your reply, so here will do. You've completely ignored my main point. I get that you want projects to pass on the torch, but saying open source will otherwise die is ridiculous.
        stavros 3y ago
        "Continue choosing to sunset"? A large amount of projects does not sunset, it gets passed on instead.
      - 3y ago
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y ago
  Isn't xz a prime example of why we don't just hand over the reigns anymore? Like the guy said, they can just fork it.
- prmoustache 3y ago
  It is not killed, anyone can pull the repo and work on it.
- logicziller 3y ago
  He did mention in his post that he's not gonna handover the project to someone he doesn't trust.
MuffinFlavored 3y ago
> I've been giving less and less attention to PiVPN, and the desire to keep up with it is no longer what it once was. I wonder if financial/monetary incentive would change this. I don't think it would personally (because putting a value on your free time/mental load/time you can spend with your loved ones doing something else away from the PC is precious) On the flip side... $500/mo? $1k/mo? $5k/mo? I'm sure most projects that go "defunct" open-source-free-no-financial-incentive-thanklessly-help-build-something could probably find "motivated maintainers" for $3k/mo on average? Internationally? Is the "capitalist" answer "this repo and all of its efforts are not worth $3k/mo to the open market"?
- DeathArrow 3y ago
  Who will pay? For sure there are developers willing to take care of it if they are payed, but who is willing to pay them?
- powersnail 3y ago
  A lot of these projects are made in people's leisure time, without profitability, for other fellow geeks, and the users also uses them in their hobbies. And as fellow geeks, we are more likely to be financially poised to be on the other side of the equation: getting paid to write code, rather than being able to pay a developer's wage, at least not in the long term, not in any maintainable manner. Can you afford to pay yourself 3k/month to maintain such a project, without any profitability, just for a hobby?
  - ianlevesque 3y ago
    Agreed. Also often the gap between what people will pay for a hobby project and what money is being made at a tech company by the people who have the hobby is vast. Sometimes there are contractual restrictions on taking money from other jobs simultaneously that complicate it.
- Nullabillity 3y ago
  You could probably get someone, but would you get someone good (competent, trustworthy, etc)? Perhaps Jia Tan is looking for a new gig.

This is the best way to conclude a project like this, I wish more clear cut "this is the end" choices were made. An ecosystem with zombie projects isn't healthy.

stavros 3y ago

Why? I wish people would put their projects in something like https://www.codeshelter.co https://www.codeshelter.co so anyone who's interested can maintain them, instead of just killing them.

bornfreddy 3y ago
Do you, as the project maintainer and possibly even founder, trust these people?
- stavros 3y ago
  The maintainers are vetted before joining, and are removed if they do something untoward, but when the choice is between killing the project or giving it to some random person, Code Shelter provides a better alternative.
  - sthlmb 3y ago
    What if they pass the joining process but then later sneak something in that goes undetected until things go boom? There are alternatives, you can fork the original project, and things will go on. As others have said too, you can just update the underlying software and there's a good chance that the wrapper itself will continue functioning, providing there are no giant breaking changes and by that point, a fork or alternative will likely have handled it.
    - stavros 3y ago
      What if there's no joining process, and they contact a maintainer directly, and peer pressure them to hand over the project, and the maintainer does, and then they sneak a backdoor in some binary test files?
      - eropple 3y ago
        That scenario is exactly what PiVPN is avoiding by refusing to nominate a new maintainer and telling interested parties to fork--so what is your actual and concrete objection? Fork the project. Earn your own trust.
        stavros 3y ago
        > so what is your actual and concrete objection? This: > I wish people would put their projects in something like https://www.codeshelter.co https://www.codeshelter.co so anyone who's interested can maintain them, instead of just killing them
        eropple 3y ago
        So to me that says you want it both ways, for while I appreciate what the codeshelter folks are trying to do, it is a task that is going to turn out Sudden But Inevitable Betrayals. Instead of contacting a maintainer directly, they just look sufficiently polished that codeshelter says "yeah, sure, OK" and hands it over. Forking the project and earning your own trust really is the safe path forward.
Narishma 3y ago
They can still fork the project and continue maintaining it if they want. Nobody's stopping them.
reachableceo 3y ago
The project can be forked with a single click. That’s the beauty of GitHub.
- Zambyte 3y ago
  That's actually the beauty of git, and any other DVCSs. It's one click to "fork" with lots of other forges as well.
- eviks 3y ago
  Where do you click second to make all the (dozens of) contributors even be aware of your first single click?
BossingAround 3y ago
You can maintain it right now. Make a fork, and continue development. You might even get some shoutout from the original devs. It's all open source after all, making this repo read-only doesn't mean the project's dead if the community is vibrant enough.
- stavros 3y ago
  The community matters. It's one thing to get control of the official websites, official packages, etc, and another to have to tell every single user "come use my fork".
  - planb 3y ago
    But this is dangerous. There are many „Jia Tans“ out there who would love to continue maintenance of those projects with the full community.
    - stavros 3y ago
      Yeah, we always knew there were. Open source can't stop existing because there are bad actors.
      - sevg 3y ago
        So you're saying that if projects continue choosing to sunset without handing over the keys to the kingdom, open source will stop existing? This is simply not even close to true. Edit: I can't reply to your reply, so here will do. You've completely ignored my main point. I get that you want projects to pass on the torch, but saying open source will otherwise die is ridiculous.
        stavros 3y ago
        "Continue choosing to sunset"? A large amount of projects does not sunset, it gets passed on instead.
    - 3y ago
8n4vidtmkvmk 3y ago
Isn't xz a prime example of why we don't just hand over the reigns anymore? Like the guy said, they can just fork it.
prmoustache 3y ago
It is not killed, anyone can pull the repo and work on it.
logicziller 3y ago
He did mention in his post that he's not gonna handover the project to someone he doesn't trust.

MuffinFlavored 3y ago

> I've been giving less and less attention to PiVPN, and the desire to keep up with it is no longer what it once was. I wonder if financial/monetary incentive would change this. I don't think it would personally (because putting a value on your free time/mental load/time you can spend with your loved ones doing something else away from the PC is precious) On the flip side... $500/mo? $1k/mo? $5k/mo? I'm sure most projects that go "defunct" open-source-free-no-financial-incentive-thanklessly-help-build-something could probably find "motivated maintainers" for $3k/mo on average? Internationally? Is the "capitalist" answer "this repo and all of its efforts are not worth $3k/mo to the open market"?

DeathArrow 3y ago
Who will pay? For sure there are developers willing to take care of it if they are payed, but who is willing to pay them?
powersnail 3y ago
A lot of these projects are made in people's leisure time, without profitability, for other fellow geeks, and the users also uses them in their hobbies. And as fellow geeks, we are more likely to be financially poised to be on the other side of the equation: getting paid to write code, rather than being able to pay a developer's wage, at least not in the long term, not in any maintainable manner. Can you afford to pay yourself 3k/month to maintain such a project, without any profitability, just for a hobby?
- ianlevesque 3y ago
  Agreed. Also often the gap between what people will pay for a hobby project and what money is being made at a tech company by the people who have the hobby is vast. Sometimes there are contractual restrictions on taking money from other jobs simultaneously that complicate it.
Nullabillity 3y ago
You could probably get someone, but would you get someone good (competent, trustworthy, etc)? Perhaps Jia Tan is looking for a new gig.