Someone starts a new #FOSS project as a hobby activity.

[akdb@mastodon.social]

@smallcircles I think it's justified because, well, the developer is benevolent for sharing their work, dictator because they are making all the decisions, and for life because presumably they want to keep the project forever. For me, maybe because this is the first time seeing "BDFL", it doesn't have any negative, insulting connotations to it. :). I'm so sorry that 'BDFL' criticism about projects are upsetting people. It can't be easy seeing your brain child fall.

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@abekonge yes, it gets interesting pretty quick, right?

> What if you are the only one that can handle that axe and supply wood to your neighborhood.

Then you can take it upon yourself to do that for them. You willingly accept responsibility for it, and thereby you make a commitment to the community to do this work.. under reasonable circumstances.

It is clear, there's common understanding, and matching expectations.

I had a thought for a best-practice:

https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508224930993093

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@Shamar @jannem @abekonge

Oh, I was not aware of an existing practice around POLITICS.txt .. is there one, and a resource to share?

I just thought of something similar at: https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508224930993093

[smallcircles@social.coop]

I am sorry people. There are too many replies for me to respond to them all. Please check other branches of the discussion as your question may already be addressed there.

[iinavpov@mastodon.online]

@smallcircles
I think the tension is that you built a public project, invited the public to partake, but somehow never meant the public to participate meaningfully (including governance).

I think that if you have a hobby project, it's fine. But if you want to *build* an open source project with no thought about governance, you're doing it wrong.

Exception: you *really* want it to grow and approach hobbies like work. Then BDFL can work for a while.
@mir

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@BillySmith @laxla Thank you!

There's a lotta info around. I'm seeking best-practices to include in something of a pattern library to pick'n choose from.

Inspired by this whole discussion I just formulated one myself:

> "Expected behavior in the #CodeOfConduct of a #FOSS project should be aligned with a #StatementOfCommitment by those having ownership of the project."

I may bring that to a post at #SocialCoding movement https://discuss.coding.social

See also: https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508224930993093

[dahukanna@mastodon.social]

@smallcircles @jenniferplusplus
Someone who chooses to handmake arts & crafts (good & cheap) is not called BDFL because they can’t physically & financially make quantity to meet “unpaid” demand & expectations.
This is a “supply & demand” economic & power dynamics problem masquerading as a software technology “commons” problem.

Good, fast, cheap ven diagrams(truth table)
- Good+fast = expensive
- Good+cheap = slow
- Cheap and fast = low quality
- Good + fast + cheap = impossible (expectations)

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@joelving sure. And I understand and even agree to most of the arguments made in this entire thread.

At some point frictions are 100% certain to emerge, and also - in majority of cases - not dealt with in an optimal way (not say, often handled badly).

We need good/best-practices for mitigating risk of unaligned expectations and lay the basis for a healthy and well-understood governance model (if where that model's theme is "Hobby Project").

Here's my wood chop analogy: https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508151463049043

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@unexpectedteapot

Yes, there may be a tipping point where that statement is perfectly valid and justified. But when that happens is not clearly defined. There is a gradual shift in the social dynamics in the course of the project's lifecycle.

(I use the notion of a Free Software Development Lifecycle or #FSDL for this, that can be explicitly reckoned with in the dev process)

See my analogy and follow-up best-practice idea to help mitigate the issue: https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508151463049043

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@laxla @mir

The crucial word in your reply is "imo". Everyone's "in my opinion" taken together is chaos, goes all over the place.

To lay a good basis for "ethical judgment" the expectations must be set correctly by all participants.

In this analogy toot I ramp up to one idea to help do that: https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508151463049043

[billysmith@social.coop]

@smallcircles @laxla

I've found that the Servant Leadership pattern works best for me, but it has to be balanced with making sure that other people don't take the piss.

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@akdb yes, burnout is a common theme for maintainers of popular FOSS projects, unfortunately. So many more aspects than just "the fun of coding" start to play a role as a project gains traction and popularity. For many project that also happens spontaneously, and only much later there is a realization that "things are getting serious now". And then a hobby turns into full-time volunteering and dealing with people who feel various levels of entitlement to be heard or see their contributions added

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@iinavpov @mir

Indeed. I define a #FSDL as the process where you take things explicitly into account. See e.g https://social.coop/@smallcircles/113508307986680735

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@dahukanna @jenniferplusplus

Nice diagram. Though I am wondering if you aren't addressing a slightly different angle here.

I am sorry. This thread has exploded, and I cannot keep up with replies. There are many interesting perspectives and ideas in the many branches of this discussion, though.

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@BillySmith @laxla

Yes. Nice that mention. We get some good best-practice/ design pattern names here, and input for a conceptual model on how moving parts fit together.

[billysmith@social.coop]

@smallcircles @laxla

I was just using it as a practice before i knew the formal name for it.

It's a creative, constructive, anarchist approach that makes you put your energy where your mouth is...

"If i have enough energy to complain, then i have enough energy to fix it."

Also, learning new skills is fun

[smallcircles@social.coop]

@BillySmith @laxla

Yess. That's the attitude!

[onepict@chaos.social]

@smallcircles I think it depends. On the type of project and what community grows up around you. Like if you're building an app but federated, then expectations are set.

If the criticism leveraged is about trust and safety then yes. If you've taken funding absolutely. If your project is the dominant player in blogging and you endanger the livelyhood of the folks who helped you make it popular again yes.

[onepict@chaos.social]

@smallcircles If you enjoy coding and you don't build up the additional support you need you risk burnout.

It comes down to who you choose to support you on that coding. Yes many projects with a BDFL are a hobby project. You do often need a single person to direct how it should be built.

But when you start getting the pull requests and other questions, sometimes it's best to hand over some of that triage to someone else. Plus fund that help.

Many hats, one Esther

(www.onepict.com)

[jens@social.finkhaeuser.de]

@smallcircles This thread beautifully illustrates the power of definition.

Give the power of definition to the project's initiator? It's a hobby project, they can do what they want.

Give the power of definition to the users? It's a vital piece of their digital life, so the maintainer better take it seriously!

So which is it?