Open source projects should run office hours

Post by 1f60c » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 10:23 AM UTC

mcherm wrote: post #140

matkoniecz wrote: post #90

I have deep aversion to "Open source projects should run office hours" title. Maybe "Office hours may be a good idea for open source projects"? This would not suggest obligation. In general, fact that someone created or maintains or supports open source projects should not be considered to create any obligations beyond lack of malice and abuse. I am not obligated to support any bugs, create any features and it is per…

I saw the title and thought to myself, "No one has the right to tell open source volunteers how to spend their time! The only way an article with that title is acceptable is if it's talking about benefits to the DEVELOPER, not the user." Then I read the article and it IS using "should" in the sense of "I found this beneficial, you may too" rather than "this is an obligation".

Post by daveed » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 10:25 AM UTC

vinger wrote: post #65

daveed wrote: post #27

Hi! If you're thinking of giving office hours for your project... I've been working on a site ( http://booktime.xyz/ ) that's meant for this. It's like a calendly where you can manage different meeting types more easily, they can be paid or unpaid, and we keep your contact private. Feel free to email me at (david@booktime.xyz) too. We've been polishing it up, and I'm happy to take feedback.

Can I book a slot in your office hour window to talk about using your service or do I need to email you?

Post by vidarh » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 10:36 AM UTC

Aeolun wrote: post #116

TeMPOraL wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beyond unversities, it's also a term sometimes used by Y Combinator, which also contributes to its spread. (That's how I learned it can mean something else than "when the workplace is open". English is not my first language.)

I think in this case it’s meant to be ‘hours when I’m guaranteed to be in my office’. Mostly applicable to academia, because who the hell has their own office right now.

Post by teh_klev » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 11:15 AM UTC

capableweb wrote: post #144

teh_klev wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should doesn't mean must, the title is ok with me. See also :) https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119

The IETF is not the ones deciding how the English language works, especially not outside of their own specifications ;) But, if we're using IETFs grammar: "Should" here implies unless you have a good reason, you should do this. For anything related to open source (which is based on voluntary contributions and practices), that's a bad choice. "May" would be a better pick here, to remove the assumed obligation to run o…

Post by matkoniecz » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 11:22 AM UTC

whizzter wrote: post #114

matkoniecz wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I referred specifically to the title in my comment. It is part of things personally irritating to me, and something what is biggest threat to small open source projects that I like. People are mistaken in thinking that having an open source project implies any obligation beyond lack of malice. And people tired by dealing with that are one of top reason why open source projects disappear or are never created.

The title is kinda unclear for someone non-English/US, for me office hours only means the actual hours when things are worked on (rather than any kind of availability time). So skimming the title it quickly I read it as "Open source projects should run on office hours" since my mind filled that in, kinda implied that someone in another part of the world should adjust their life hours to contribute to OSS. (Yes after…