Absolutely...not, well some do. I stopped using/contributing to Gaim/Pigdin a long time ago because of this. Ask for a simple feature and explain why it's helpful for you as to show meritorious reason for requesting said feature, only to be insulted, disrespected, or at the very least turned down without consideration.
I stopped reporting bugs to ubuntu as well. Because real bugs were turned into questions or closed, or ignored.
So I took up programming and will never use it again. there are plenty others out there. I always thought open source software was a great idea. It's starting to seem like capitalism in disguise.
On the contrary, it's the lack of capitalism that you've run up against.
The maintainers of projects don't care overmuch about your opinion because they don't have any reason to. If you want someone who's eager to please, you should be looking for someone whose ability to keep the bills paid depends on whether you're happy enough to keep giving them money.
TL;DR - no. And that's before considering the validity of their data collection method.
The general OSS project tend to start when someone has an itch to scratch. They build something which solves that problem and upload the source somewhere. The next step is determined by 2 questions:
1) Does the developer keep having the same itch?
2) Does the developer get support from a company or someone else who has the same itch?
If not, the code becomes part of the Sourceforge wasteland of unmaintained, unused code.
Github is an interesting attempt to keep the itch-scratching alive by making forking easy, but when there are 10 different forks for similar functionality, all by people of unknown coding ability, rewriting or reforking becomes the safest option.
Independent FOSS developers are also doing it for fun. I don't think that detail gets enough credit. It means that by default most FOSS developers aren't going to be nearly as interested in making significant contributions to an existing project as they are in starting their own project. For most of us maintaining existing code, fixing other people's bugs, and dealing with project politics are sure-fire fun killers. So getting involved in an existing project would defeat the purpose. On the other hand, the fact that my from-scratch project may not ever be useful to anyone else is at best a remote concern.
Judging from what people are saying here, I guess we're lucky. The open source code we're using to publish our iPad magazine is run by AWESOME people who have a lot of passion for their work. They're clear about what the road-map is and let people know that when features are proposed that aren't in it. I can't say enough good things about them, check them out - https://github.com/simbul/baker
9 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 31.2 ms ] threadI stopped reporting bugs to ubuntu as well. Because real bugs were turned into questions or closed, or ignored.
So I took up programming and will never use it again. there are plenty others out there. I always thought open source software was a great idea. It's starting to seem like capitalism in disguise.
Sitting on a throne has its up sides, regardless of what the peons think.
The maintainers of projects don't care overmuch about your opinion because they don't have any reason to. If you want someone who's eager to please, you should be looking for someone whose ability to keep the bills paid depends on whether you're happy enough to keep giving them money.
The general OSS project tend to start when someone has an itch to scratch. They build something which solves that problem and upload the source somewhere. The next step is determined by 2 questions:
1) Does the developer keep having the same itch? 2) Does the developer get support from a company or someone else who has the same itch?
If not, the code becomes part of the Sourceforge wasteland of unmaintained, unused code.
Github is an interesting attempt to keep the itch-scratching alive by making forking easy, but when there are 10 different forks for similar functionality, all by people of unknown coding ability, rewriting or reforking becomes the safest option.
Independent FOSS developers are also doing it for fun. I don't think that detail gets enough credit. It means that by default most FOSS developers aren't going to be nearly as interested in making significant contributions to an existing project as they are in starting their own project. For most of us maintaining existing code, fixing other people's bugs, and dealing with project politics are sure-fire fun killers. So getting involved in an existing project would defeat the purpose. On the other hand, the fact that my from-scratch project may not ever be useful to anyone else is at best a remote concern.