Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My boundaries as an open source developer

joeldenning.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 251 posts

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#181

Post by jjav »

woah wrote: post #34

I totally get where they are coming from but it does make it sound like unsupported software. After reading that, I would not use it without completely understanding the code as if I had written it myself (and maybe that's what you should do for every dependency anyway). I would probably look for another open source project to use instead. There seems to be a constant supply of people starting open source projects wh…

> I totally get where they are coming from but it does make it sound like unsupported software.

It is very specifically unsupported software! Read the license, it's right there in a legal document clearly spelled out (for many licenses, anyway).

> After reading that, I would not use it without completely understanding the code as if I had written it myself (and maybe that's what you should do for every dependency anyway).

A good phrase is that importing an open source library is like adopting a puppy. Sure you get the initial code for free, but all the work and mess from there on it's all on you.

Yes, if you want to rely on an open source library for production you do need to understand it as if you'd written it yourself! I know this principle has been lost in more recent times, but it remains reality. If you don't, you're just gambling on the hope that it'll work out. It can, but it's a gamble.

If you need more certainty, pay for a support contract with SLAs.

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#182

Post by awill88 »

I wonder if there could be a way to just turn off issues and only accept PRs. Contribution-driven feature requests. That would be a boundary that I think would protect the maintainer from the potential outcome that the article about boundaries does absolutely nothing. Open is open, people are relentless and unforgiving, that’s why I don’t have the stomach for it. But if I see something I’d like to do with a project, I will take a whack at implementing it and giving back.

I can imagine gaining a distaste for seeing companies benefit without being rewarded in return. With that, perhaps it’s time to seek out other maintainers? If we’re talking open source here, shouldn’t successful projects become co-owned (ie maintained) by the community?

While a single maintainer who creates a successful open sourced software certainly earns the discretion to choose to share their invention(s) or not, holding tightly onto the projects as opposed to donating them seems as unproductive as a random person demanding features.

But I am not the maintainer so I don’t mean to convey apathy, my completely naive, lizard brain would just want to troll the worst of them with “open a PR and we’ll talk”

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#183

Post by mhils »

awill88 wrote: post #182

I wonder if there could be a way to just turn off issues and only accept PRs. Contribution-driven feature requests. That would be a boundary that I think would protect the maintainer from the potential outcome that the article about boundaries does absolutely nothing. Open is open, people are relentless and unforgiving, that’s why I don’t have the stomach for it. But if I see something I’d like to do with a project,…

FWIW, you can disable the Issues tab on GitHub, there's a setting for it.

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#185

Post by vaylian »

awill88 wrote: post #182

I wonder if there could be a way to just turn off issues and only accept PRs. Contribution-driven feature requests. That would be a boundary that I think would protect the maintainer from the potential outcome that the article about boundaries does absolutely nothing. Open is open, people are relentless and unforgiving, that’s why I don’t have the stomach for it. But if I see something I’d like to do with a project,…

> I wonder if there could be a way to just turn off issues and only accept PRs

That would create the problem, that people won't able to ask if a feature is desired by the maintainer. New contributors would spend time on a PR and then learn that the original developer considers that feature to be out of scope and therefore the development effort would be wasted.

I understand your wish for removing the issue tab. But there is a downside to it.

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#186

Post by [deleted] »

thenerdhead wrote: post #55

I think the missing aspect is that the platforms put this stuff in front of your face and human curiosity will have your attention directed at it anyway. You will actively be thinking about that troll who opened up an issue or someone in your Twitter DMs asking for help. Although I respect the author's boundaries, that is sadly just part of the job of putting your work on the internet. This does not just stop at open…

[deleted]

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#187

Post by tpxl »

morgante wrote: post #154
mikepurvis wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I related pretty strongly to this. I've never tried to monetize, and the community I'm mostly working in (ROS) is populated almost exclusively with exactly the sort of kind, considerate people who will happily roll up their sleeves to take a crack at it themselves, given a little guidance. Nonetheless, there are dozens of effectively abandonware ROS projects out there attached to my name— drivers for some sensor I sh…

> And in some cases I've just granted PR authors write access and been like "there it's yours now." But none of these end states feel quite right; in all cases I end up feeling guilty and unsatisfied with how it turns out. What feels wrong with this? Personally I'd much rather hand a project over to someone else than leave it completely archived.

This has resulted in projects turning to malware multiple times.

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#188

Post by hbx »

awill88 wrote: post #182

I wonder if there could be a way to just turn off issues and only accept PRs. Contribution-driven feature requests. That would be a boundary that I think would protect the maintainer from the potential outcome that the article about boundaries does absolutely nothing. Open is open, people are relentless and unforgiving, that’s why I don’t have the stomach for it. But if I see something I’d like to do with a project,…

Since Nov 2021, you can allow some people to bypass pull requests requirements. https://github.blog/changelog/2021-11-19-allow-bypassing-req...

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#189

Post by wildmanx »

ricardobeat wrote: post #118
wildmanx wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I totally get where they are coming from but it does make it sound like unsupported software. All software is "unsupported software" unless explicitly stated otherwise. Just because some software has its software published under an open source license does not make it magically "supported". Not more than any proprietary software. If you want support, pay for it. You can already be glad that somebody published the s…

By “unsupported software” I don’t think he means any kind of support for his particular use of the software, but simply the pace of development - keeping up with system API evolution, dependencies, fixing bugs in the original code. Software rots, and you generally don’t want to adopt a project that is not having basic maintenance being done.

It's your right to as a user choose projects based on that criterion. It sounds reasonable to me.

But it's not your right to demand anything from a project, including demanding that they do basic maintenance or disclose whether they are going to do it. Maybe they don't even know, or maybe they change their mind lots of times ever year or every day. If you don't get a promise of this happening, neither assume anything nor start to demand it.

(Even if you get a promise, if it's some individual writing something on the net, it's not worth much. If they fail doing it despite the promise, they are being idiots, which they are free to be, and you are free to ignore them going forward or be angry.)

The attitude that published open source software is generally expected to be supported with basic maintenance is bad. It burns out creators who also believe in this myth and it creates an atmosphere that fosters this and in the end, less software is placed under open source licenses because people feel that that would include some obligation after. It does not. Just because you find some piece of code on the internet does not entitle you to anything.

Re: My boundaries as an open source developer

#190

Post by tome »

enraged_camel wrote: post #143
wildmanx wrote: post #108

So much this. I'm glad he put this out there. I'll start linking to it too. There seems to be a common misconception about open source. When I release software as open source, it does not mean I work for you for free, need to provide you with anything, even need to be nice to you. I may. Or I may not. When I release software under an open source license, then we have a very specific deal. You are entitled to do certa…

I will preface this by saying I have immense respect for anyone who open-sources their work. I think the web as we know it today would not exist without such kind and hard-working individuals. In my opinion, I think most of these issues outlined in the article are caused by lack of communication combined with unclear expectations, to be honest. The only thing I ask of open-source library authors/maintainers is this:…

Totally agreed. One of the easiest ways to deal with misaligned expectations is to clearly state your expectations.
Post reply on HN