[heurisko]

> You don't spend nearly as much time mucking around with broken open source components.

I was recently frustrated with a poor quality open sourced FAANG library. At one point the error message was something like "Successful: operation failed."

There are also the cases where services are just built on open source components, then branded.

I have much preferred working and integrating with open source components, as when something goes wrong, at least you can see what is happening.

[joshuamorton]

The experience between "using a thing that a FAANG company threw over the wall to the OSS community" and "using a FAANG's developer infrastructure, which is staffed by a team of developers, as well as an on-call team with a 5-minute response time for large issues, and highly responsive mailing lists or chat rooms for individual issues or questions, and whose code is visible to most employees and accepts contributions when you find a bug or annoyance" is vast.

[heurisko]

We have company support from FAANG, without mentioning which specifically. The library is an SDK used to interface with one of their core products.

We raised several issues, including the one I mentioned.

They were put on the backlog several months ago, and haven't been looked into yet, although I mentioned they were a blocker.

I also have to chase up some unanswered emails.

The original comment was an opinion that you don't have to spend time "mucking around" with "broken" open source components.

My experience has shown that just because something is provided by FAANG doesn't mean the experience is necessarily any better.

[joshuamorton]

> The original comment was an opinion that you don't have to spend time "mucking around" with "broken" open source components.

Right, like I said, there's a difference between the level of support you're receiving and what the internal infra receives. Your experience is totally unrelated to the developer tooling teams at FAANG. Those teams don't, generally speaking have external clients, and when they do they don't have the same support requirements.

It's like if I said "I really enjoy the concierge service I get as a premium partner of my credit card company" and you replied that you didn't get that perk. Sure you don't, but I do as do the other people who pay for it.

Your experience as a not faang engineer doesn't provide any insight into how things work internally, and it's really weird to say that they are wrong. Or on other words, yes, FAANG companies can provide different levels of support for things. In the case of they're internal dev tools, the support is better (and a lot of the tools are generally better, although GitHub is finally catching up)

[heurisko]

I misread the original comment, apologies.