Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by IshKebab 46 days ago
You don't really though. Sure you can fork it and fix your issue, but then what? Are you going to maintain your fork in perpetuity? Are you going to patch all the software that depends on the code you fixed to use your version instead of upstream? Are you going to get your users to do that too?

In most cases this is extremely impractical.
3 comments
spiffyk 46 days ago
> but then what?

Then you send the patch upstream, they incorporate and maintain it for you. Congratulations, you just FOSSed.

link
swiftcoder 46 days ago
> Then you send the patch upstream, they incorporate and maintain it for you

Firing patches upstream is still adding burden to the (likely already over-burdened) maintainers.

In an ideal world, if you want a patch upstreamed, you would be contributing to upstream maintenance (or at least donating to the upstream maintainers)...

link
spiffyk 46 days ago
Fair, but it is less of a burden than just submitting a report with no proposed fix. Also, submitting quality patches regularly seems to be a good way to eventually become a maintainer, provided that both sides are interested (cURL generally is – at least that seemed to be the vibe at the last year's cURL Up event I attended).
link
necovek 46 days ago
I believe both are valid: sometimes upstreams are not set up for donations, and sometimes your org will make it easier to submit a patch or to financially sponsor a maintainer.
link
necovek 46 days ago
We are talking about a case when maintainer is unavailable to do the work: what would happen if this was a proprietary dependency and the maintainer is gone (eg. bankrupt, moved on, incapacitated...)?

There is nothing unusual about this, businesses face this all the time, the only difference is that you do have some agency with FOSS.

What's the alternative when it is not FOSS? Eg. build it yourself from scratch (and maintain it too), or move to a competing product.

link
megous 46 days ago
Yes, you can maintain your fork for perpetuity if you can't/will not get your changes upstream. Why is that a problem?

If you're using any complicated FOSS professionally and you have SLA with your customers to say fix issues within day or two you don't have a choice anyway.

link
IshKebab 46 days ago
> Why is that a problem?

Because it's a ton of unnecessary work. And because of the other reasons I said.

> If you're using any complicated FOSS professionally and you have SLA with your customers to say fix issues within day or two you don't have a choice anyway.

This is true. I always try to upstream patches anyway though.

link
necovek 46 days ago
How do you define unnecessary work if this is... necessary for you?

You are already benefiting from getting the tool/library/system for free, so you can still compare writing the thing you need (necessary?) from scratch or adapting the FOSS solution — maintenance comes with both options.

When you invest enough and are lucky, someone else might just fix the thing for you or pick it up and maintain it for you — but do not count on it, and you are good.

link