How to Contribute to Open Source Software(killalldefects.com)
killalldefects.com
How to Contribute to Open Source Software
https://killalldefects.com/2020/01/26/how-to-contribute-to-open-source-software/
12 comments
Why are you calling them "abandoned"? On the site, you say it's for projects that need some help. I don't think people looking to contribute to OSS want to find "abandoned" projects to contribute to.
Some just need help, some are completely abandoned. Maybe people don't want that, personally I contribute to less-maintained projects I find useful.
I would like to know Why I should contribute to Open Source when Microsoft is a massive company that has plenty of resources to fix its own bugs.
Sure if you are at Uni, Just starting out or something that not likely to be commercial (console emulator, hobbyist projects etc) it might be a good way to get some experience and something to put on the CV. Otherwise you are just giving your hard work away for free to companies that have plenty of money to to put plenty of developers to work on it.
Sure if you are at Uni, Just starting out or something that not likely to be commercial (console emulator, hobbyist projects etc) it might be a good way to get some experience and something to put on the CV. Otherwise you are just giving your hard work away for free to companies that have plenty of money to to put plenty of developers to work on it.
It's entirely possible to contribute to projects that don't have massive backers. :)
I've watched with great interest over time how Microsoft has evolved from closed source to open source. IMHO, Much of their motivation derives from huge demand from the community to open source their software. Developers benefit in several ways by being able to quickly fix bugs, possibility (depends on project) of adding a feature, and desire to contribute to the community on software they like. There has also been several products that Microsoft has decided to stop providing, but have lived on through community adoption, which is huge if developers have dedicated their own time to learn and integrate the software with their own projects over time. Open source also gives developers a say in the development of products, watching it being built in the open, influencing direction/features, and making it easier to understand what the code does under the hood. Additionally, Microsoft has embraced and supported 3rd party open source for a number of years, building on their relationship with the community.
This reply is total buzzword salad.
> I've watched with great interest over time how Microsoft has evolved from closed source to open source. IMHO, Much of their motivation derives from huge demand from the community to open source their software.
I am not a Microsoft hater but that is half true. The fact of the matter is that in 2010-2012ish their tech stack basically wasn't cool anymore and back then if you had cut me I would have bled Microsoft blue. The fact of the matter is that newest Juniors don't like working with the old Microsoft stack. Outside of .NET core everything release (including the newer versions of Visual Studio since 2010) hasn't really been adopted.
> Developers benefit in several ways by being able to quickly fix bugs, possibility (depends on project) of adding a feature, and desire to contribute to the community on software they like.
Is this a copy and paste answer of the "benefits of open source"?
The point I was making was that these huge companies (all of the large companies) have taken open source software and put most of the useful bits to tie it all together and put it behind pay walls (PaaS).
If a patch or a set of patches is not in <insert big companies interest> it probably won't be allowed in the project. Forks of these projects generally die because there isn't a dedicated resource unlike <insert large company can provide>.
> There has also been several products that Microsoft has decided to stop providing, but have lived on through community adoption, which is huge if developers have dedicated their own time to learn and integrate the software with their own projects over time.
Which ones? Almost everything that isn't officially in the Microsoft repos for the most part is dead. The few things that are .NET that have survived are quite small tbh.
> Open source also gives developers a say in the development of products, watching it being built in the open, influencing direction/features, and making it easier to understand what the code does under the hood. Additionally, Microsoft has embraced and supported 3rd party open source for a number of years, building on their relationship with the community.
Gives how much of a say. Not much I would reckon.
> I've watched with great interest over time how Microsoft has evolved from closed source to open source. IMHO, Much of their motivation derives from huge demand from the community to open source their software.
I am not a Microsoft hater but that is half true. The fact of the matter is that in 2010-2012ish their tech stack basically wasn't cool anymore and back then if you had cut me I would have bled Microsoft blue. The fact of the matter is that newest Juniors don't like working with the old Microsoft stack. Outside of .NET core everything release (including the newer versions of Visual Studio since 2010) hasn't really been adopted.
> Developers benefit in several ways by being able to quickly fix bugs, possibility (depends on project) of adding a feature, and desire to contribute to the community on software they like.
Is this a copy and paste answer of the "benefits of open source"?
The point I was making was that these huge companies (all of the large companies) have taken open source software and put most of the useful bits to tie it all together and put it behind pay walls (PaaS).
If a patch or a set of patches is not in <insert big companies interest> it probably won't be allowed in the project. Forks of these projects generally die because there isn't a dedicated resource unlike <insert large company can provide>.
> There has also been several products that Microsoft has decided to stop providing, but have lived on through community adoption, which is huge if developers have dedicated their own time to learn and integrate the software with their own projects over time.
Which ones? Almost everything that isn't officially in the Microsoft repos for the most part is dead. The few things that are .NET that have survived are quite small tbh.
> Open source also gives developers a say in the development of products, watching it being built in the open, influencing direction/features, and making it easier to understand what the code does under the hood. Additionally, Microsoft has embraced and supported 3rd party open source for a number of years, building on their relationship with the community.
Gives how much of a say. Not much I would reckon.
A huge chunk of OSS work that always needs to be done is the thankless task of grooming the backlog of issues.
Project management is indeed an important skill.
Project management is indeed an important skill.
Open source and Microsoft Corporation.
I expected something different like the kernel, the Linux kernel, or a Java package, python tool, or something. Not vs, .bet (yes .bet) and Microsoft.
Funny how Microsoft is bring pushed everywhere still.
I expected something different like the kernel, the Linux kernel, or a Java package, python tool, or something. Not vs, .bet (yes .bet) and Microsoft.
Funny how Microsoft is bring pushed everywhere still.
I thought it was odd, too. But I'm very glad to see this. Open Source is a powerful and good force, it's awesome to see new people jumping in.
I'm looking for tips to make this project public usable.
https://github.com/imvetri/ui-editor
https://github.com/imvetri/ui-editor
Disclosure: I started this.