4 ms·
But “open source” doesn’t mean you have to accept PRs or deal with other people, right? Can’t the source just be hosted somewhere with no PRs or issues or comme
by nkrisc 2mo ago
But “open source” doesn’t mean you have to accept PRs or deal with other people, right? Can’t the source just be hosted somewhere with no PRs or issues or comments or anything?
If they don’t want to do even that, then that’s fine, it’s their choice. But it seems like there’s a reasonable middle ground that’s just being skipped over.
- boesboes 2mo agoThey still spam you to death and threaten you with violence if you don't reply soooo
- ImHereToVote 2mo agoI don't understand why people don't just fork. Especially in the age of agentic AI. Take the code and slop it to your hearts content.
- derdi 2mo agoMany people want "contributed to <well-known project>" on their CV.
- ImHereToVote 2mo agosad
- barnabee 2mo agoDon't provide a way to do so. Just not using GitHub would probably solve most of the problems.
- kasajian 2mo agoThat b.s. It has to do with the fact that the project is not making it clear that it's not interested in PRs. Don't have Issues. Don't have PRs. Just push your code to github. Add to the README that this is a mirror of the actual development branch that follows an internal process. The Github repo is only used as a way to publish the latest snapshot of the source. The "going closed source" because of harassment is just an knee-jerk punitive reactionary response. It's akin to taking your ball and going home.
- hoherd 2mo agoThat is an orthogonal problem: popularity. What you're describing happens to proprietary software too. I have a bunch of OSS software that almost nobody cares about and I don't get bothered. The difference seems pedantic, but I bet there is something useful to learn there.