Comment by seagreen | Hacker News Reader

Comment by seagreen | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Open contributions project.

That's a useful distinction and a good term.

So in total projects can be classified as:

    - Source available or not
    - Open source or not (a subset of source available)
    - Open contributions or not (also a subset of source available)
    - BDFL or community driven

That's a lot of variation and may explain why so many conversations about open source sound like people are talking past each other-- they're talking about different kinds of projects!

PS: Regarding:

> 1: Yet hell will freeze over before Github lets maintainers turn off the PR tab which would lessen this problem a bit.

I wish there was a standardized way of declaring this, I always feel so awkward writing the "no PRs" disclaimer on my toy projects.

> That's a lot of variation and may explain why so many conversations about open source sound like people are talking past each other

Most of the discussion is people suffering through GitHub-style social networks. I don't see a lot of people talking through each other, as much as I see people assuming this is the way, and others pointing out it's just one option.

At some point we have to acknowledge that GitHub is a toxic social network. The toxicity is way more hidden than Facebook and others like it, but it's there too. Every universalist social network is toxic.

GitHub is absolutely toxic which is why we develop on GitLab instead. The reduction in the slowly creeping "social features" and non-existence of drive-by activism is great.

Gitlab's approach to the problem is making every UI redesign even worse than the one before, so people have to click through 3 menus just to file an issue.

The latest redesign is egregious to say the least.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com