What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
nolanlawson.com
What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
1–6 of 6 posts
Re: What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
#2This is the most accurate description I have ever read of what it's like to have a moderately popular open-source project. The sad thing is that it ends with "there is no solution to this problem that I am aware of".
Re: What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
#3> Nobody opens an issue or a pull request when they’re satisfied with your work.
That seems overly negative.
I open pull requests when a project almost does what I need but not quite. Or when I track down a bug and propose a fix, at the very least a way to reproduce the issue if I can’t figure out why.
Maybe it’s a kinder, gentler world in C/C++ and python land?
Re: What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
#4> What you want most of all is to have more projects that maintain themselves. You try to follow all the best practices: you have a CONTRIBUTING.md and a code of conduct, you enthusiastically hand out owner privileges to anyone who submits a high-quality PR.
I've helped out on other people's projects a lot in the past - enough to be given write access which I guess is what this guy means by owner privileges.
I walked away as soon as I stopped being interested in contributing, with no regrets, even though I could see the project needed help and I had become an expert in it. Why? Because I was not an owner. The project still has the other guy's name on it and if it's successful all the recognition goes to him.
So, while I feel a lot of sympathy for what has been written here and even have experienced some of it myself (the huge list of GitHub notifications especially resonates), I feel it's missing something important: if you really want to get people to become co-owners of your open source project,you need to give up control. Take your name off the front. Create a Github organization and move the project there. Give people actual control rather than pretend ownership that you can take back on a whim. Remove your ego and your name from your OSS projects and start to think of providing them as a service, start to treat long term contributors as equal teammates and you'll have a much better chance of creating projects that sustain themselves. On the other hand, if you're determined to keep your name on the front of the tin, well, isn't it fair that you do most of the work too? After all you're not paying anyone else for their contributions.
Re: What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
#5Love this article for how precise its description of the suffering is. I am of the people mentioned who disappear, and now trying to slowly find my way back in, but without burning out.
One strategy that ought to be mentioned is “scratch the itch”. I.e write your projects in a way that works for you, but clearly has itches to be fixed (e.g. small list of texture formats in a graphics engine). That way it’s clear for the user that a PR is needed, and it could result in a group of contributors early on (until the itch becomes rare).
In other words, owners often fall into a trap by making their projects almost perfect, but not quite. Users complain when they see such state of things. Owners should be more egotistical to their needs.
Re: What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer (2017)
#6> What you want most of all is to have more projects that maintain themselves. You try to follow all the best practices: you have a CONTRIBUTING.md and a code of conduct, you enthusiastically hand out owner privileges to anyone who submits a high-quality PR. I've helped out on other people's projects a lot in the past - enough to be given write access which I guess is what this guy means by owner privileges. I walked…
To follow-up on this, it’s a good habit to never personalize your projects in the first place. Don’t say “my project” unless specifically asked for history or ownership of it. Be “we” everywhere.