Seems like you guys want either 0% or 100% ..that something either not exist at all or perfectly does everything you ever wanted without any effort or cost on your part.
Seems like you guys want either 0% or 100% ..that something either not exist at all or perfectly does everything you ever wanted without any effort or cost on your part.
This dynamic presents a legitimate problem for pretty much any open source project that aims to abstract away something very complex to enable more developers to use it. Any project that does this is going to have more developers relying on it than are capable of contributing to it.
You should never feel entitled to continued development of a project you don't contribute to, and you should always assess the community around tools you want to use in order to make good decisions. But this doesn't mean you can't be super frustrated if something you rely on goes dormant. I personally avoid using any library/package that doesn't appear to be very active, but nothing is foolproof. Even a seemingly healthy project die can fairly quickly in certain circumstances.
Or, you know, that's a strawman, and we just want something that exists and is mature, like hundreds of other FOSS people are fine with, as opposed to basing our code on something that is immature, has little community, and will probably be abandoned when the authors get bored with it.
Which has nothing to do with it being "100%" or "perfectly doing everything we ever wanted".