[pamoroso]

Stars, forks, algorithmic rankings, or other popularity metrics are actually the least important things for me. Assuming a project does what I need, what I'm interested in is the availability of good documentation, how understandable the code is, when was the project last updated, and other clues that have little to do with popularity.

[slayerjain]

For a complex project it can be hard to go through the codebase. I have seen many projects where the development is active and the docs looms good but are quickly become outdated because of low usage.

[pamoroso]

I'm a hobby programmer with no production requirements, so I often use projects maintained by only one developer who may not be much active if all all. Also, since I program in Lisp, code updated a few years ago may still be good.

[keploy]

I see the importance of solid documentation and recent updates, but low-star projects often raise concerns about longevity. How do you gauge that?

[pamoroso]

I addressed this in my reply to slayerjain above. As a hobbyist I don't mind projects that may be infrequently maintained or abandoned.