|
|
|
|
|
by billjings
1420 days ago
|
|
I worked at FB, too, and I can confirm you speak the truth. This process is problematic, though. The "special case" is the standard process at FB: to make external contributors second class citizens. They have their reasons, but doing this pushes the locus of discussion and action to the place where work happens fastest: inside the company. That means that the interests of FB engineers drive the project; in other words, not open. That argument is I'm sure open to some logical nitpicking. But the evidence speaks for itself: Facebook open source projects aren't responsive to the outside community, and they language when FB's priorities shift. So their strategy has been pennywise, pound foolish in my view: they get the short term benefits of an "open" project, but they're incapable of actually being good open source custodians. |
|
As an outsider and frequent consumer of some high profile open source projects 'owned' by Big Tech Companies I get the feeling that this same thing happens everywhere.
It probably does make good business sense but from out here it's a little odd.