442
This doesn't surprise me at all... Just like bots in games. Selling a service that benefits another. Its shady, but definitely believable.
Also, what if this is an actual viable way to "market" for an open source project?
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2024
442 points (99.1% liked)
Open Source
31886 readers
458 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Tbh I never look at stars, but do at prs and issues
Closed PRs and Closed issues?
What if it's a side project with 1 star, 0 issues (because no one made any) and no PRs because no ones done work on it?
More so if spme software had dozens or hundreds of open issues/PRs for months that never get looked at I'll look elsewhere
Don't want unstable dependencies
Really does depend on what we are talking about. Some random software that is not critical? Sure. Some system breaking library that would take down my servers in case of malfunction? No bueno.
Throwing out FUD.
The stars reflect the marketing effort put in. Has no correlation to the software quality or whether it's critical or not.
Initially, the stats will reflect amount of marketing effort put into the project.
The marketing will attract both users and a flow of issues and PRs.
I've done zero marketing for my packages. And it shows ;-)