of course, this is really gitlab's fault for offering a free service tier without actually backing it up with explicit support, which would've forced them to define a function for what sorts of projects can use the free tier with an expectation of ongoing availability for the software commons.

Follow

@brion they're probably doing it for money reasons, but I really hate all of the stuff on GH that has been dead for year and years but still shows up in searches and people's dependencies.

Feels like telling projects that are no longer being used helps to clean up the ecosystem.

@ted code search *is* a hard problem, true, and doesn't get easier when there's lots of stuff. ;)

but sometimes... the 10-year old abandoned project is *exactly what I need* to solve my problem, either reviving it or learning from it.

my professional experience as an open source software developer really makes me shy away from the idea of making search easier by simply deleting things permanently ;_;

@brion sure, that does happen.

I have to wonder the number of cases of it being successful vs. the number of times that people take on an unmaintained security vulnerability though.

Not a clear answer either way. But I think things need to get off the "easy to use" list somehow. Where you have to revive it and realize you're agreeing to maintain it to bring it back as a dependency.

@ted now that I'll agree with :D

there's a real role for curation

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!