Sorry everybody, I failed with you • Hacker News Board

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#191

Post by scrps » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:13 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #164

altf4 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I've been working on a Go library for 8 years now that I'm sure is used by quite some people and companies, and I've been close to burnout and letting it go at least twice. I'm super happy when people just "Buy me a coffee"--not for the coffee but for the feedback you get that someone is using your project, so it's valuable for someone. I'm very grateful for that, even without financial support. I think GitH…

> I think GitHub should really have a way for users of your repository to somehow illustrate that they're using your project. Well "stars" are kind of like that. Also the insights page tells you how many times your repo is being cloned per day, so that's one metric you can use to see how "used" your project is. You can also search GitHub for the name of your project and see how many other projects are cross referenci…

It would be nice to have a similar system to the language metric at the bottom of a repo, have something like a library metric that list what external libraries a project uses and feed those metrics back to the maintainers.

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#192

Post by leejoramo » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #164

altf4 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I've been working on a Go library for 8 years now that I'm sure is used by quite some people and companies, and I've been close to burnout and letting it go at least twice. I'm super happy when people just "Buy me a coffee"--not for the coffee but for the feedback you get that someone is using your project, so it's valuable for someone. I'm very grateful for that, even without financial support. I think GitH…

> I think GitHub should really have a way for users of your repository to somehow illustrate that they're using your project. Well "stars" are kind of like that. Also the insights page tells you how many times your repo is being cloned per day, so that's one metric you can use to see how "used" your project is. You can also search GitHub for the name of your project and see how many other projects are cross referenci…

I am afraid that within GitHub I mostly use stars as a bookmark for projects I find interesting and may want to check out in the future.

If I fork a project I am more likely to actually be using it, although in fact I have plenty of forks from simply evaluating or playing with a project

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#193

Post by fsflover » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:17 PM UTC

nlitened wrote: post #140

fsflover wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't need more laws. There is something called a License Agreement. We just need UBI.

How would UBI help software developers pay for their libraries? They are already among the most highly paid professionals.

People who enjoy doing open-source will be able to dedicate more time to their (very useful) hobby.

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#194

Post by snth » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:23 PM UTC

mumblemumble wrote: post #187

glangdale wrote: post #98

Seeing a lot of posts like this. Open source is wonderful in its way, but it's really not sustainable to work on projects that make money for other people - including big commercial interests - when they don't help out in any fashion. I'm not just talking money or contributions. I'm talking about simple acknowledgement: "we use project X" - even privately. A open source library that I worked on at Intel (the Hypersca…

I've actively resisted open sourcing some things I've written at work - including stuff that I'm sure others would like - precisely because of fears that it would be a career-limiting move. For my employer, these libraries are only valuable to the extent that they help us build things for which we can charge money. An open source library would not be one of those things, but it would take time (and therefore company…

I think getting your name and work out in the world with open source work is a career _advancing_ move.

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#195

Post by Vaslo » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:27 PM UTC

hnthrowaway2 wrote: post #159

Vaslo wrote: post #133

This is kind of sad to read, that someone building and maintaining a free product feels compelled to over apologize for want burning out. It may just be my cynical view of the world but it just seems like more and more people are demanding higher and higher levels of service for things that they don’t pay much if anything for. I play a game right now that is in Beta called Dual Universe. Some people paid for Kickstar…

This has probably something to do with big tech companies putting out highly polished products for "free" while making money in no-so-obvious ways. People have been conditioned to expect high quality work for free.

Excellent point - and people forget the side benefits of those “free” projects are raking millions into the company.

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#196

Post by makecheck » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:28 PM UTC

Even when open source is “attributed”, that is usually done in the laziest and bare-minimum way possible (like being buried multiple levels deep in some “Acknowledgements” item, that simply displays a 45 page text document with unzoomable and unsearchable text that casually lists the dozens of open source libraries used).

Unfortunately there are a lot of people who really will do the bare minimum and take everything they possibly can from projects and give absolutely nothing back.

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#197

Post by llaolleh » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:28 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #135

glangdale wrote: post #98

Seeing a lot of posts like this. Open source is wonderful in its way, but it's really not sustainable to work on projects that make money for other people - including big commercial interests - when they don't help out in any fashion. I'm not just talking money or contributions. I'm talking about simple acknowledgement: "we use project X" - even privately. A open source library that I worked on at Intel (the Hypersca…

I feel like Github and co could do a LOT more to help open source project maintainers and contributors rewarded. They can offer a new subscription model for people with expendable income and companies with benefits, on a per user basis instead of a per project one. They can offer monetizing issues, e.g. promoting a question or issue report with an X amount of currency. OS maintainers can create a bot that asks people…

These are great ideas. You should shoot the higher ups an email and a link to the thread.

Your suggestions seem like a win win for Github and the hardworking OSS maintainers.

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#198

Post by NoGravitas » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:30 PM UTC

zx2391 wrote: post #36

I maintain OS projects and my stance is simple: I'll fix thing, that are broken - mostly because I want things to work. I won't add new features for you, unless I really see the appeal. If you come up with a PR, nice! I'll take the time to review, but even for that there is no guarantee. The same limits I impose on the community I fully expect to follow when working with any OS project. Period. Remember, in that "oth…

> Remember, in that "other world", we would have to pay for each and every little proprietary piece of sh* code. The "new world" will not be built by profit-maximizing value-extractors, and if you think it will, then I wish you a happy burnout.

Yeah, I think there are a couple of problems with Open Source as it is done today.

One is that people are making things that are useful to profit-maximizing value-extractors. I don't know how much is because their "itch" is aligned with them, or because that's the way to get a top project on GitHub and make a name for yourself. But seriously: stop making things that are useful to profit-maximizing value extractors. Make software that is useless[1].

The second is that we really have no kind of license to discourage the use of useful software by profit-maximizing value-extractors. In large part, this is, IMO, because FLOSS licenses have prioritized the rights of the user (who may be a profit-maximizing value-extractor) over those of the author or the community. It is also in part because licenses seem to be the wrong kind of tool for controlling how our software is used. CopyFarleft and Ethical Source licenses are trying to tackle this, but not very successfully, I think.

[1]: https://ando.life/journal/the-useless-tree

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#199

Post by lolsal » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:32 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #135

glangdale wrote: post #98

Seeing a lot of posts like this. Open source is wonderful in its way, but it's really not sustainable to work on projects that make money for other people - including big commercial interests - when they don't help out in any fashion. I'm not just talking money or contributions. I'm talking about simple acknowledgement: "we use project X" - even privately. A open source library that I worked on at Intel (the Hypersca…

I feel like Github and co could do a LOT more to help open source project maintainers and contributors rewarded. They can offer a new subscription model for people with expendable income and companies with benefits, on a per user basis instead of a per project one. They can offer monetizing issues, e.g. promoting a question or issue report with an X amount of currency. OS maintainers can create a bot that asks people…

A counter-argument to these ideas is that because it's open source, I'd just fork whatever I wanted to use and re-host somewhere else.

Maybe if it was an optional and project-oriented patreon-style?

Re: Sorry everybody, I failed with you

#200

Post by gabereiser » Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

What’s really sad about this (and other open source devs with pressure from users) is the lack of support _from the users_. Open source should be about being able to dive in and add the wishlist item you have. A lot of people put up this wall that only changes can be made by the author, proliferating this onslaught of requests from the user and in the end burning out the author.

If you manage an open source project, you owe it to yourself to make it clear how other devs can contribute and add features they want to see. Don’t be the choke point. Open it up. That’s the whole point. Make it clear how a user can add to the codebase and encourage them to do so.