This made me wonder: I haven't updated it not because it's abandoned, but because there's nothing that really needs changing. It's stable and does what it's supposed to do.
I’ve had similar experiences before—when recommending a GitHub repo to someone, if they see it hasn’t been updated in months, their first question is usually: “Is this still working?” I then have to explain that yes, it still works.
Even large projects face this problem. If a popular repo goes a few months without commits, someone will inevitably open an issue asking: “Is this project still maintained?”
So I’m curious—how do you deal with this perception? Should we add notes in every README saying “This project is stable and doesn’t need updates”? Or is this just something that changes slowly over time as people better understand open source dynamics? Or, worst of all, should we start pushing out unnecessary updates just to show activity?
goku12•6mo ago
And yes, the solution is to add a note right at the top of README, saying that the project is not abandoned and any new bugfixes or feature updates will be considered. Ideally, this should be standardized, with a common way to represent project status across all projects.
fernvenue•6mo ago
fuzzfactor•6mo ago
It could even be something like a badge of honor for developers to strive for which needs to be earned. Like they have in industrial environments where they proudly post how many months or years they have gone without a serious injury.
Maybe people would respond positively to a prominent "safety notice", if I saw "No further defects found since July 2023" that would be more encouraging than not for a lot of projects.
goku12•6mo ago
We could an issue for code forges including github to implement it such that it is shown as project metadata along side license, language, etc. Perhaps the project can be automatically marked as inactive if the maintainer(s) don't respond every 3 months or so (of course with provision to easily revert it).
[1] https://pypi.org/classifiers/