I like this idea. It'd be nice if more websites felt like little town squares.

Very interesting take. This gives very valid ground on why tech communities should reject AI based contributions. Not doing so will indeed hinder the commons communities rely on to exist and improve. This is a path to prevent getting better at inclusivity and diversity (which is really needed).

This is very concerning. We don't need Wikipedia to fall prey to this kind of tactics... On the contrary!

Not sure it warranted the "dumb" mention in the title. Still it's likely a good idea to have a list of the ways projects can die.

Indeed, a reminder that the two concepts are not necessarily aligned. It kind of misses the point about corporate Open Source with no open contributions which can be easily captured as well. But indeed for the individual side project you might not need the whole burden of issues and contributions, you get to choose.

It totally makes sense. If you're a FOSS project you have to invest in getting more long term contributors, which requires mentoring. The contributions themselves are not something to maximise. I wish more communities would follow that path.

Interesting call, our field like anything undertaken by mankind is worthless without community. Also community can't sustain if you got an anti human agenda.

Kind of resonate oddly with the string of talks I gave talking about craftsmanship a decade ago. Looks like FOSS communities at large have no choice but get inspired by such old practice.

Interesting points. Forums are clearly not good replacements for mailing lists. They might be a good complementary to mailing lists but both have very different affordances.

This is a very rich article. There's indeed more and more a rift between Open Source projects used by hyperscalers and the ones used by smaller businesses and individuals. You likely want to aim for the latter.

Github is definitely entrenched by now. Students and beginners hardly look for projects outside of it. Sad state of affair.

This piece is (unsurprisingly) biased. Still there's some truth there. C++ is here to stay, like it or not. The safety issues are overblown and are getting addressed. Now where the article is lacking is that the language has other issues. Also, will profiles ever become a real thing?

Indeed, social media even the fediverse isn't really about communication or community, it's about consuming content.

This is really a big problem that those companies created for Free Software communities. Due to the lack of regulation they're going around distributing copyright removal machines and profiting from them. They should have been barred from ingesting copyleft material in the first place.

Nice little post, indeed the license is not enough to base a decision on. You need to look at the business, presence of CLA or not, etc.

Very good move on their part. It's time more people do so. Beside, Forgejo (powering Codeberg) looks very interesting. I plan to play with it more next year.

This is indeed the best way to handle your open source dependencies. I got concerns about the ability to sell that to management though because of the extra steps. It's also probably why you want to have an OSPO in your company, it's a good way to lower the barrier for developers to contribute this way.

This is a very valid question. The most likely answer is somewhat cruel though.

This latest development in the Ruby community is rather concerning.

Very nice article on the Wikipedia success. Or why being boring and the ultimate process pettiness became the crucial part of the formula. This community really developed a fascinating culture which so far resists to mounting political pressure... But will the editors morale hold?