Open Source is one person

134 points by drmorr


kornel

Maybe we’re looking at a wrong unit of collaboration?

An average npm dependency tree is definitely not all by one person. In fact, a common criticism of small-package ecosystems is that there are too many different authors involved.

Perhaps publishing of small packages is just a more convenient way to collaborate? Especially in open-source that is naturally distributed and communicating asynchronously. Instead of multiple devs working on fragments of a single monolith library, each dev can work on their bit behind a library interface. The package boundary means there’s less coordination required. When devs disagree about the goals, forking or replacing a small library is less explosive than a disagreement within a large monolith project.

Having internal library boundaries within a project can be useful on its own: preventing unintentional layering violations and tangling of components that were supposed to be separate. Rust/Cargo projects split themselves into tiny component libraries even when the libraries are completely project-specific and aren’t reused anywhere else. It just helps organize the code and isolate dependencies.

txxnano

I’ll add that not only “alone”, to not derailed the post, but exploited by big corporations that they “know” that WE, in our field, are some kind of special, with our craft and with the time we decide to spend on it; I don’t know a single living person that has the passion software people has about its own.

We build “toys” for ourselves all the time, we want to be as productive as we can with our own ideas, we configure our own servers, we build from scratch everything, etc, all because of “we like” it.

I might be completely wrong and my sample could be small enough to make this a completely senseless claim, but I really believe that kind of “naive” way of seeing the world will end, and even more now with the raise of AI, that we already started to see

People coded for fun on competitions just for the sake of Google to take those results and trainings and use companies such as Turing to completely automatize thousands of jobs of people “reading” the actual code

Furthermore, I was reading and enjoying until you reach, so I’ll drop a quick note

So we’re going to use the NPM ecosystem to explain this

NPM is by any means a good example on contributors and open source, and for sake of this, you can take an example of Vercel and Next.js. One of the (if not the most) most used open source projects in the world of Javascript.

Maintained by a corporation. Node.js it’s the one you can claim it’s still in the open, but they have thousands of contributors. Same for Bun, etc. Usually this libraries on NPM are just one fork away to be replicated, it’s “simple” code with a few handful exceptions (that’s part of the issue why NPM is an utterly mess).

creesch

I think the number is likely even higher once up the threshold to 1.5 maintainers. So many projects that effectively run on one person (sometimes two) holding it together with some incidental additional maintainers tagging along for a few months here and there.

None of the open source projects I have been involved in have been as critical like some of the libraries half the world seems to run on. But some of them have been big enough to have a dedicated user base, actively requesting features and support. There were a large amount of people who expressed polite interest in contributing. Even a large amount of people decrying that it shouldn’t be that so few people maintain the product. Yet that rarely if ever translated to people actually trying to contribute. Most contributions were incidental and just one time contributions (which I still value to be clear) but the amount of longer time collaborations were rare. Basically the 90-9-1 rule in full effect.

strongoose

The obvious answer to this problem, which this blog post doesn’t quite get to, is infrastructure funding.

Unfortunately for the US, their government doesn’t really have any interest in using its economic power to subsidize underresourced digital public goods. Presumably they are hoping The Market will fix it (it won’t). So the question is really who will fund it.

It makes me feel that there’s an opportunity here for countries who are interested in “digital sovereignty” to take up the mantle.

hc

Let’s face it, the Russians aren’t dumb enough to backdoor a package owned by a guy living in Russia

i have a very different level of faith in the russian government than OP

i think you face a similar risk when storing data in any company run by an american: the specific american has basically nothing to do with it, if they get a FISA secret court warrant