Not very typical "widely used" project but recently surpassed 100k+ installs with two people working on it part-time.
Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
91–100 of 112 posts
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#92In this thread: Wildly different definitions of what "widely used" means :) Did you know tools like uname [1] and cat [2] in GNU coreutils have essentially only had two contributors in the past decade? [1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=histor... [2] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=histor...
I'm actually surprised by the amount of changes in 'cat'. One would assume a program like that is already 'done'.
To be fair, there are a lot of commits that just update copyright years or documentation. IMHO that's just regular housekeeping and cannot mean that cat was not "done" in first place.
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#93It almost feels like it's easier to list which fundamental projects have more than one active maintainer. Many of the core library and tools are mostly finished and have very little yearly activity. How many maintainers does a project have if the last activity was one or two commits made or maybe just merged by one maintainer 3 years ago, and few more 5 years ago. Does it count as 2 maintainers, 1 maintainer, 0 maint…
> Many of the core library and tools are mostly finished and have very little yearly activity
Yeah. The ad-hoc, de-facto "Standard Library" for JavaScript, the "web", and fullstack web apps.
OSS ecosystem is sometimes so very "Down and out in the magic Kingdom" adhocracy like. Shame we haven't got the rest of the Bitchun' society's perks. :) hahaha!
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absent any changes in a year, the copyright year shouldn't be updated. Otherwise what you're claiming is that the copyright term starts from a date after creation of the content, so it's getting artificially extended.
The change in question isn’t about going from “Copyright (C) 2023” to “Copyright (C) 2024” but from “Copyright (C) 1998-2023” to “Copyright (C) 1998-2024”. Thus your case doesn’t apply, it’s not confusing. What I’m saying is that as far as I understand, having “Copyright (C) 1998” and not changing it would suffice.
Yes, I read your comment as saying that having the starting year and changing it every year would be sufficient. Which it isn't, but I've seen it often enough elsewhere that it's worth calling out.
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absent any changes in a year, the copyright year shouldn't be updated. Otherwise what you're claiming is that the copyright term starts from a date after creation of the content, so it's getting artificially extended.
Every time you change code and commit it, is it not a new program? New editions of books have new copyright years, since they’re new books. Same thing with code
That's why my first word was "absent".
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#96People ask this question a lot in academia. The system just about incentivizes creating dupliware and/or abandonware that is critical to a domain, field, or niche, so there is tons of it (there is also A LOT of very good stable software, but ignoring this for now). This makes it very difficult for new parties to find open source software they can rely on, for funders to determine what software to support, for institutions to track their contributions, etc.
I am working on a project solving for this specific question (and many others), across the open source and open science ecosystems, starting with open source research software but ultimately intends to touch the whole space. Among other things, we want to take continuous measurements of the health of open source projects, the use of open source projects, the perception of open source projects, the "impact of open source projects", and the needs of open source projects. We are combining data collection with stigmergic markers and eventual webs of trust.
It is incubated by NumFOCUS, and includes collaborations from across the academic industry.
Bringing it here for your thoughts.
The project is called "The Map of Open Source Science" (MOSS) and is built on the "Simply Omniscient Layer" (SOL). It is essentially an omniscient open permissionless graph database of the digital knowledge and research ecosystems, as well as a corresponding visualization (eventually people will be able to build their own visualizations interfacing with SOL).
Very recent presentation at PyData Vermont: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c51njj9JPs
Recentish update: https://www.opensource.science/updates/the-map-of-open-sourc...
Landing page for the program: https://opensource.science
From our site:
"MOSS is a comprehensive, composable, interactive map of the digital knowledge and research ecosystems. We identify connections between open source research software projects, research papers, organizations, patents, datasets, funding pathways, AI models and applications, and the people who drive it all.
The MOSS proof of concept so far demonstrates nine use-cases:
Identify relevant tools for your research
Showcase the impact and connections of the people that make and maintain open source research tools
Showcase the impact and connections of the organizations that build, support, and fund development of open source research tools
Showcase the impact and connections of open source research tools
Identify gaps in open source research tooling
Navigate repetition of open source research tool features
Identify, prevent, and reinvigorate abandoned open source research tools
Streamline the grant submission and review process
Navigate security flaw identification - who to contact, what downstream tools are effected, what alternative tools exist"
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have something nearly as popular as these other projects; but if you have a popular project, a potential employer might offer work hours for it to get you as an employee. Further, as a contributor of some now popular projects with one other maintainer, I can say that I mostly do it for fun. My current employer gives zero-fucks about it but if a new employer were to use it to woo me away, I would jump in a hea…
Copyright on your contributions may belong to employer during employment period in most jurisdictions.
My employment contract specifically allows me to keep any rights that I do on my own time and equipment that doesn't compete in certain areas -- and enumerates those industries.
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#98In this thread: Wildly different definitions of what "widely used" means :) Did you know tools like uname [1] and cat [2] in GNU coreutils have essentially only had two contributors in the past decade? [1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=histor... [2] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=histor...
I'm actually surprised by the amount of changes in 'cat'. One would assume a program like that is already 'done'.
How about the history for "true": https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commits/master/src/tr...
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#99quic-go: https://github.com/quic-go/quic-go/
Re: Which open-source projects are widely used but maintained by just a few people?
#100SQLite - https://www.sqlite.org/draft/crew.html
Looks like this is the non-draft URL - https://www.sqlite.org/crew.html