In fact, I would encourage more unsupported maintainers to do just that. Stop rushing to fix bugs for people without a support contract. Patch security flaws at a more leisurely pace unless someone is willing to pay for greater urgency. Take your time and enjoy your hobby more, since that is what unpaid software maintenance is. Collaborate with other people only so much as it brings you joy.
💯 times this. Pay or it will be fixed when the maintainer has time. They have no obligations to fix or implement shit. Pay up or square up.
I would add “if the bug report comes from a corporation refuse to fix it and ask for a patch”.
Well I assume if the developer is using the thing they are developing they may push themselves a bit with security flaws.
The issues tab should’ve been a tip jar this whole time, which is why when a repository of mine gets popular I just disable the issues tab.
When your code is open then yes, you are giving your time and energy and yes, you are being generous, but also other people become dependent on you and your understanding of the codebase. I think making a codebase Open Source is a commitment. If you want to give your time but are not ready for a major commitment, maybe join another project and contribute in that way, but don’t pollute the global namespace with a half-commitment on a project that should remain a private repository, at least find some collaborators and think long-term.
Nope. I make my code open source so the code is there in case someone finds it useful. I ain’t supporting it outside of what I can be bothered to do though. It’s open source, you chose to use it, it’s on you to support yourself.
looking at it from the other side, there should be a bug fixing bonus users could contribute to. although i suspect it would be very easy to abuse from multiple angles
