Precisely! :) I'm also of the belief that by making something public, you assume _at least some_ responsibility for maintenance. Otherwise, one should be explicit up-front that they don't intend to maintain the software in any way.
centrist? users are entitled to reasonably thorough, up-to-date documentation, but not to free technical support from humans.https://twitter.com/fosskers/status/998360770667675648 …
-
-
-
it's so important. when evaluating library software (and I use a lot of it, FOSS community is amazing and their work is very appreciated) the main things I'm looking for are good online docs and some signs of responsiveness to bug reports from users.
-
where responsiveness means something like "is willing to accept PR's patching user reported bugs." don't expect the library authors to fix every reported bug themselves unless it's severe and critical (like a huge security hole or something).
-
This seems to me to be a reasonable stance to take.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.