FOSS "just fork it" delusion
hamishcampbell.com
FOSS "just fork it" delusion
1–10 of 91 posts
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#2Bottom line: Open Source is a *community* system built around a few flawed assumptions.
These inherent problems are not new or unique or unexpected --- they have all been faced by similar *community* constructs in the past.
The biggest impediments to success are some of the most fundamental, unavoidable characteristics of human nature. And the last ditch effort at maintaining similar systems has often involved forced labor.
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#3The subtext here is that there's a difference between someone saying "I don't like this community, I'm going to make my own" and "I don't like this community, I'm going to change it".
Building communities is hard. It's not obvious why someone who wants a community on their terms gets to piggyback on an existing community rather than putting the effort in to make their own.
The point of "just fork it" is that if your ideas are popular, then sustainability shouldn't be a problem.
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#4Ooh, this is gold: "The slogan pretends to be anti-authority, but in practice it is used to protect informal power."
Spot on. I almost never see "just fork it" brought up in a context that acknowledges what that would actually take. It mostly shows up as a way of shutting down discussion, and often has a flavor of victim-blaming to me.
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#5The subtext here is that there's a difference between someone saying "I don't like this community, I'm going to make my own" and "I don't like this community, I'm going to change it". Building communities is hard. It's not obvious why someone who wants a community on their terms gets to piggyback on an existing community rather than putting the effort in to make their own. The point of "just fork it" is that if your…
The problem with that premise is that often, projects can be having trouble with sustainability already, so even if you're getting 90% of the people in your fork, that might still be too few.
If 90% of the contributions are by 10 people, if the project is large enough, losing one of them is going to be an enormous additional tax on people unless you can get an additional one to step up.
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#6Ooh, this is gold: "The slogan pretends to be anti-authority, but in practice it is used to protect informal power." Spot on. I almost never see "just fork it" brought up in a context that acknowledges what that would actually take. It mostly shows up as a way of shutting down discussion, and often has a flavor of victim-blaming to me.
I agree it’s often used to shut down discussion, but most often I’ve seen it when a contributor is losing an argument (their PR isn’t getting merged, or their feature request is rejected, or their bug is marked wont-fix) and they don’t agree.
“Victim blaming” is an odd phrase here. Could you clarify what you mean?
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#7The subtext here is that there's a difference between someone saying "I don't like this community, I'm going to make my own" and "I don't like this community, I'm going to change it". Building communities is hard. It's not obvious why someone who wants a community on their terms gets to piggyback on an existing community rather than putting the effort in to make their own. The point of "just fork it" is that if your…
Every community is the sum of its members. Each person who joins changes it, at least a bit. And each of those members is changing and growing.
When community members have different needs, forking should be a last resort. It's expensive, and it's wasteful unless two different groups have irreconcilable needs. It should only ever be suggested as a last resort, after other options have been exhausted.
However, it's often used as a first resort to shut down criticism and to protect existing power structures. The person who speaks up is, as here, treated as an outsider and an exploiter.
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#8The subtext here is that there's a difference between someone saying "I don't like this community, I'm going to make my own" and "I don't like this community, I'm going to change it". Building communities is hard. It's not obvious why someone who wants a community on their terms gets to piggyback on an existing community rather than putting the effort in to make their own. The point of "just fork it" is that if your…
Every community is the sum of its members. Each person who joins changes it, at least a bit. And each of those members is changing and growing. When community members have different needs, forking should be a last resort. It's expensive, and it's wasteful unless two different groups have irreconcilable needs. It should only ever be suggested as a last resort, after other options have been exhausted. However, it's oft…
I rarely see good faith engagements being immediately shut down with "just fork it" (you'd never accept issues / MRs!). Instead it's usually used as a last resort when the "exploiter" doesn't get their way and starts whining about it.
If a change is proposed that's completely counter to a community's stated values, then I guess "fork it" is a more appropriate immediate response, because it's hard to see how such a clash could be resolved without fundamental change.
Edit
> Every community is the sum of its members
A community is much more than the sum of it's members.
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#9[flagged]
Re: FOSS "just fork it" delusion
#10There's software where the continued existence of a diligent community around that project is necessary (web browsers, OS drivers, security-critical software...), but there's also software where I don't need any of that and I'm grateful for the chance to ignore any community around it and keep using the software anyway. Sometimes ideas just aren't compatible, and that's fine, forking allows us to part amicably.
I wish I could "just fork" most social problems. As FLOSS developers, we have the great luxury of being able to fork, and all we lose is the community, other people's considerations for our preferences. But for social problems, the people are the point, so "forking" alone wouldn't accomplish anything, not to mention physical limitations that make forking e.g. a country impossible.