4 ms·

Plenty of comments of "So sad I have been using this". How many actually contributed back to keep it going?

by pjmlp 7mo ago

LetMeLogin 7mo ago
I am not sure why are you gatekeeping this? People can't comment now that they are sad because of what happened?
- pjmlp 7mo ago
  Gatekeeping?!? Those that paid, or did any kind of contributions upstream are entitled to be sad. Others should consider this is what happens to that lego piece in Nebraska, when no one contributes, and everyone uses it.
  - piva00 7mo ago
    That is exactly gatekeeping, no? You are only entitled to feel sad if you contributed effort or financially, otherwise you aren't allowed to feel. Why can't others that just used the tool feel sad? It is supposed to be used, it's the whole reason for it to exist; not everyone using it will have technical expertise or money to contribute to it, feeling sad about it when it solved issues for someone is a completely normal response.
    - AndyNemmity 7mo ago
      The reason for something to exist is not to be used. He was paid while doing it, and that pay stopped, and he kept doing it. Now he wishes to stop. The reason for something to exist is someone finds joy doing it. Especially when they are unpaid. The sadness should be focused on his inability to support himself with a tool that clearly a lot of companies, and people are using and gaining value for.
      - piva00 7mo ago
        The reason for a tool to exist is to be used, even if it's just by a singular person, other projects that aren't tools do definitely fit into the criteria "just for the joy of it" but a tool, by definition, has at least one usage, and building a tool gives someone joy from the tool being useful. The sadness doesn't need to be focused anywhere, you can feel sad for more than one thing at a time. People can be sad that a tool they think is great, have relied on, and has been important for their use case is going away while also be sad that such a great tool doesn't get enough support from companies. Both can be true, no need to control what people can or should feel.
  - electroly 7mo ago
    They're right. This is over the top. Your initial post in this thread was sensible (telling the users of Pgbackrest that they should have supported it if they didn't want this to happen, and saying nothing about what emotions are valid to have), but you took it much further here. People should financially support the OSS projects they use, and the lack of such support is why this project is no longer maintained, but claiming people aren't allowed to feel anything about it is just playing a game that isn't helping the cause. We all know this problem, and being sad while having not supported the project isn't a statement that we disagree that the problem exists. It's a big stretch to assume that it is. I've never heard of this project before and I still think it's a bummer that a tool people liked and that the maintainer cared about was unable to find backing. I was never going to support it; I just heard of it for the first time today and I don't use it! I'm still sad. We're not robots here. We're fellow developers, and we know it's tough out there.
  - Aurornis 7mo ago
    > Those that paid, or did any kind of contributions upstream are entitled to be sad. I didn’t even use pgbackrest but I’m still sad to see this. I should have checked the comments first to determine my eligibility to be sad about this issue, before I had feelings that upset the sadness gatekeepers.
- jmull 7mo ago
  I’d think the lesson here is obvious, but maybe not. If you thought this project had value, you could’ve contributed to it. You probably still could. Or, if you think its value is worth $0 (to you), maybe it’s not really that sad (to you). People are expressing sadness as if there was nothing to be done about it, but, of course, there’s a really straight-forward thing that could’ve been done about it (possibly still could).
FartyMcFarter 7mo ago
The number of maintainers is always smaller than the number of users for any successful project. GitHub displays the number of contributors as 57, I don't know if that's small or not.
- deleted 7mo ago
  [deleted]
victorbjorklund 7mo ago
It's such a strawman to claim that you cannot be sad if something disappears where you have not financially or you work contributed. Someone can say that they are sad that the Notre Dame burned down even if they haven't personally contributed to Notre Dame.
- jhardcastle 7mo ago
  That comparison is fallacious too, I think. Something burning down is a tragedy, beyond anyone's control. It's also possible to love something for its beauty, and be sad that a globally historic monument suffered such an act of god that the irreplaceable art and craftsmanship is gone forever. Something closing down, perhaps because there was not enough money to sustain its continued operation, when tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people were using it? That's a perfectly appropriate time to remind folks, "if you like free software, consider donating to help sustain the almost full-time effort it takes to keep packages like this alive." Op said, "this is sad [because] I've been using this," and the implication is, "I want to keep using this but now I can't because it's gone" and making the connection that "one way to prevent this from happening to other packages you like is to contribute financially."
  - victorbjorklund 7mo ago
    Alright, take a park closing then. Can you be sad about that if you haven't personally raised money to finance the park?
    - esafak 7mo ago
      Yes, I can't finance every park. I can feel sad about people suffering throughout the world without personally supporting them all. I am an active open source contributor.
      - victorbjorklund 7mo ago
        I can’t finance every single open source project in the world either (I am also an open source contributor but with very small libs).
ordu 7mo ago
If I didn't use Pgbackrest and never contributed to it, am I entitled to feel sadness?
Quothling 7mo ago
How often are the consumers and users of tools like this also in positions to contribute financially? It's silly, but I can spin up $10000 worth of azure resources and nobody would mind (as long as they actally had a purpose etc). In contrast I doubt I'd ever get a decisionmaker to sign off on supporting an OSS project with even $50, even if we have tech that depends on it.
kreco 7mo ago
This is such hackernews comment. Not everything is about money. I can use Pgbackrest in my side project which does not generate any money. Maybe my side project is another open source project where no one give me money, but I'm still contributing to the open source ecosystem, maybe I reported bugs which help everyone. There are so may details and possible reasons to not give money and use open source software, but your negative and naive comment totally miss them.
hakube 7mo ago
People can't be sad now?
bsder 7mo ago
> How many actually contributed back to keep it going? Or why not hire the guy?! Seriously. Is nobody using this at a level where hiring the primary maintainer is a good idea?

Plenty of comments of "So sad I have been using this". How many actually contributed back to keep it going?

by pjmlp 7mo ago

Plenty of comments of "So sad I have been using this". How many actually contributed back to keep it going?

LetMeLogin 7mo ago

I am not sure why are you gatekeeping this? People can't comment now that they are sad because of what happened?

pjmlp 7mo ago
Gatekeeping?!? Those that paid, or did any kind of contributions upstream are entitled to be sad. Others should consider this is what happens to that lego piece in Nebraska, when no one contributes, and everyone uses it.
- piva00 7mo ago
  That is exactly gatekeeping, no? You are only entitled to feel sad if you contributed effort or financially, otherwise you aren't allowed to feel. Why can't others that just used the tool feel sad? It is supposed to be used, it's the whole reason for it to exist; not everyone using it will have technical expertise or money to contribute to it, feeling sad about it when it solved issues for someone is a completely normal response.
  - AndyNemmity 7mo ago
    The reason for something to exist is not to be used. He was paid while doing it, and that pay stopped, and he kept doing it. Now he wishes to stop. The reason for something to exist is someone finds joy doing it. Especially when they are unpaid. The sadness should be focused on his inability to support himself with a tool that clearly a lot of companies, and people are using and gaining value for.
    - piva00 7mo ago
      The reason for a tool to exist is to be used, even if it's just by a singular person, other projects that aren't tools do definitely fit into the criteria "just for the joy of it" but a tool, by definition, has at least one usage, and building a tool gives someone joy from the tool being useful. The sadness doesn't need to be focused anywhere, you can feel sad for more than one thing at a time. People can be sad that a tool they think is great, have relied on, and has been important for their use case is going away while also be sad that such a great tool doesn't get enough support from companies. Both can be true, no need to control what people can or should feel.
- electroly 7mo ago
  They're right. This is over the top. Your initial post in this thread was sensible (telling the users of Pgbackrest that they should have supported it if they didn't want this to happen, and saying nothing about what emotions are valid to have), but you took it much further here. People should financially support the OSS projects they use, and the lack of such support is why this project is no longer maintained, but claiming people aren't allowed to feel anything about it is just playing a game that isn't helping the cause. We all know this problem, and being sad while having not supported the project isn't a statement that we disagree that the problem exists. It's a big stretch to assume that it is. I've never heard of this project before and I still think it's a bummer that a tool people liked and that the maintainer cared about was unable to find backing. I was never going to support it; I just heard of it for the first time today and I don't use it! I'm still sad. We're not robots here. We're fellow developers, and we know it's tough out there.
- Aurornis 7mo ago
  > Those that paid, or did any kind of contributions upstream are entitled to be sad. I didn’t even use pgbackrest but I’m still sad to see this. I should have checked the comments first to determine my eligibility to be sad about this issue, before I had feelings that upset the sadness gatekeepers.
jmull 7mo ago
I’d think the lesson here is obvious, but maybe not. If you thought this project had value, you could’ve contributed to it. You probably still could. Or, if you think its value is worth $0 (to you), maybe it’s not really that sad (to you). People are expressing sadness as if there was nothing to be done about it, but, of course, there’s a really straight-forward thing that could’ve been done about it (possibly still could).

FartyMcFarter 7mo ago

The number of maintainers is always smaller than the number of users for any successful project. GitHub displays the number of contributors as 57, I don't know if that's small or not.

deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]

victorbjorklund 7mo ago

It's such a strawman to claim that you cannot be sad if something disappears where you have not financially or you work contributed. Someone can say that they are sad that the Notre Dame burned down even if they haven't personally contributed to Notre Dame.

jhardcastle 7mo ago
That comparison is fallacious too, I think. Something burning down is a tragedy, beyond anyone's control. It's also possible to love something for its beauty, and be sad that a globally historic monument suffered such an act of god that the irreplaceable art and craftsmanship is gone forever. Something closing down, perhaps because there was not enough money to sustain its continued operation, when tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people were using it? That's a perfectly appropriate time to remind folks, "if you like free software, consider donating to help sustain the almost full-time effort it takes to keep packages like this alive." Op said, "this is sad [because] I've been using this," and the implication is, "I want to keep using this but now I can't because it's gone" and making the connection that "one way to prevent this from happening to other packages you like is to contribute financially."
- victorbjorklund 7mo ago
  Alright, take a park closing then. Can you be sad about that if you haven't personally raised money to finance the park?
  - esafak 7mo ago
    Yes, I can't finance every park. I can feel sad about people suffering throughout the world without personally supporting them all. I am an active open source contributor.
    - victorbjorklund 7mo ago
      I can’t finance every single open source project in the world either (I am also an open source contributor but with very small libs).

ordu 7mo ago

If I didn't use Pgbackrest and never contributed to it, am I entitled to feel sadness?

Quothling 7mo ago

How often are the consumers and users of tools like this also in positions to contribute financially? It's silly, but I can spin up $10000 worth of azure resources and nobody would mind (as long as they actally had a purpose etc). In contrast I doubt I'd ever get a decisionmaker to sign off on supporting an OSS project with even $50, even if we have tech that depends on it.

kreco 7mo ago

This is such hackernews comment. Not everything is about money. I can use Pgbackrest in my side project which does not generate any money. Maybe my side project is another open source project where no one give me money, but I'm still contributing to the open source ecosystem, maybe I reported bugs which help everyone. There are so may details and possible reasons to not give money and use open source software, but your negative and naive comment totally miss them.

hakube 7mo ago

People can't be sad now?

bsder 7mo ago

> How many actually contributed back to keep it going? Or why not hire the guy?! Seriously. Is nobody using this at a level where hiring the primary maintainer is a good idea?