4 ms·

(I didn't downvote.) Think why would anyone be motivated to contribute to your repository, as opposed to creating a new one from scratch under one's own userna

(I didn't downvote.) Think why would anyone be motivated to contribute to your repository, as opposed to creating a new one from scratch under one's own username. Imagine you got a first pull-request, with a Go app. Then another, with a bunch of working Python scripts. Then yet another, providing a complete Python app packaged on PyPI but somewhat broken. What will you do? It doesn't matter: x-1 of x people have just wasted their time writing code that will end up under your GitHub username anyway. Yes, it has to do with reputation management, too. You'd have a project under your GitHub name written completely by other people. The way it works currently, people will tend to see it as your project. You'll be free to claim it in your portfolios and resumes. Meanwhile, creating a GitHub repository isn't a hard task, and your README contents is basically what normally happens in one's head as one designs and writes the software. In addition, and that's what may have actually caused the downvotes IMO, there's something not enjoyable about the idea of stumbling across a bunch of orders issued by a random person in writing to undefined audience, which you unexpectedly find yourself part of, by virtue of reading those orders. Your requirements, without any code, sure looked like such orders though. It wouldn't be a problem be there a big name or much publicity associated with your project (and the resulting network effect), but without that there's no challenge and no meaningful payoff. * * * Things would be different if your repo had a well-thought-out skeleton consisting of some (even if completely no-op) units and a (failing but thorough) test suite, tied up to Travis CI and what not. That would increase motivation as it would eliminate quite a bit of actual friction associated with starting a new project. Arguably one of the hardest parts would be already done—us lazy programmers will be able to look at the units, the tests, and figure out how to make it work. No need to even clone, just edit some files via GitHub web interface.

daveloyall 12y ago
> Any way, two of three people have just wasted their time writing code When I first imagined this project, I didn't picture it taking all day, from start to finish. An uninstaller doesn't do much. > The way it works currently, people will tend to see it as your project. Hm. Hold on. https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenR... Yes? > It wouldn't be a problem be there a big name or much publicity associated with that My end goal is for my local police department to pass this uninstaller out to citizens, in a similar manner to how they passed out the installer. That will never happen without the support of a big name. I'm hoping the EFF will take an interest (I've already put my name on their volunteer list some time ago). > humans don't enjoy the idea of being given orders from [random] people. Your requirements sure looked that way, though. ...I'm sorry. :( I'll look back over the README for use of the imperative voice. ...Honestly, I've heard this feedback once or twice before AFK and I wasn't sure how to change then, either. Thank you for your candid feedback, goblin89.
- goblin89 12y ago
  > When I first imagined this project, I didn't picture it taking all day, from start to finish. An uninstaller doesn't do much. That's part of the problem: drilling the problem down to atomic subtasks, which is needed to estimate, is the actual hard part. With that part done it would take little effort to complete the project, and contributors for further improvement would be easy to find. > https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenR.. https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenR.... That's better, but “Forked from…” small print doesn't escape anyone's attention, and in any case this issue goes beyond GitHub service. You'd be a ‘founder’ of something without having done much for it (keep in mind I wrote my comment before you added remover.go, and also I might be wrong about this whole point too). Sorry for calling you a random person, I was just trying to explain what I felt when I opened the repo and took a look at it.
daveloyall 12y ago
> Things would be different if your repo had a well-thought-out skeleton consisting of some (even if completely no-op) units and a (failing but thorough) test suite, tied up to Travis CI and what not. Absolutely. Here's the thing.. I can do that in Java, but not Go. I don't know how to do it in Go. Maybe that's really where I went wrong on this. (And wrong I went indeed! The downvote rate increased when I attempted to defend the idea.)

daveloyall 12y ago

> Any way, two of three people have just wasted their time writing code When I first imagined this project, I didn't picture it taking all day, from start to finish. An uninstaller doesn't do much. > The way it works currently, people will tend to see it as your project. Hm. Hold on. https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenR... Yes? > It wouldn't be a problem be there a big name or much publicity associated with that My end goal is for my local police department to pass this uninstaller out to citizens, in a similar manner to how they passed out the installer. That will never happen without the support of a big name. I'm hoping the EFF will take an interest (I've already put my name on their volunteer list some time ago). > humans don't enjoy the idea of being given orders from [random] people. Your requirements sure looked that way, though. ...I'm sorry. :( I'll look back over the README for use of the imperative voice. ...Honestly, I've heard this feedback once or twice before AFK and I wasn't sure how to change then, either. Thank you for your candid feedback, goblin89.

goblin89 12y ago
> When I first imagined this project, I didn't picture it taking all day, from start to finish. An uninstaller doesn't do much. That's part of the problem: drilling the problem down to atomic subtasks, which is needed to estimate, is the actual hard part. With that part done it would take little effort to complete the project, and contributors for further improvement would be easy to find. > https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenR.. https://github.com/ComputerCOP-OpenRemover/ComputerCOP-OpenR.... That's better, but “Forked from…” small print doesn't escape anyone's attention, and in any case this issue goes beyond GitHub service. You'd be a ‘founder’ of something without having done much for it (keep in mind I wrote my comment before you added remover.go, and also I might be wrong about this whole point too). Sorry for calling you a random person, I was just trying to explain what I felt when I opened the repo and took a look at it.

daveloyall 12y ago

> Things would be different if your repo had a well-thought-out skeleton consisting of some (even if completely no-op) units and a (failing but thorough) test suite, tied up to Travis CI and what not. Absolutely. Here's the thing.. I can do that in Java, but not Go. I don't know how to do it in Go. Maybe that's really where I went wrong on this. (And wrong I went indeed! The downvote rate increased when I attempted to defend the idea.)