13 Apr
2011
13 Apr
'11
1:01 p.m.
Richard [legalize at xmission.com] wrote:
*Most* open source code has crap quality. If you
don't
believe me, then start browsing a statistical sample of stuff
on any of the major open source hosting sites like
sourceforge, etc. Don't browse by what's most popular or
what's most downloaded, because that will focus you on only
the stuff that's actually used and maintained, which is a
very small portion of all open source software projects.
If you mean "a significant amount of stuff out there is essentially
unmaintainable"
you are almost certainly correct. But why is that such a big deal?
Surely
you only care about the things you actually use (or want to use).
Even if you depend on project Y and it's too big for you to fix a bug
that matters to you, you should be able to find someone who'll fix it
for
you for money.
That's the advantage over commercial software: you at least have the
option
of having your specific itch scratched (assuming it really does matter
enough to you). With commercial software you generally get new versions
on a regular basis but you are not likely to get fixes for the bugs that
matter to you.
Antonio
arcarlini at iee.org