Given limited time and attention, solo maintainers need to balance reactive tasks (community interactions) with proactive ones (writing code).

aggregators are pure intermediaries.

Like any other creator, these developers create work that is intertwined with, and influenced by, their users, but it’s not collaborative in the way that we typically think of online communities.

02: THE STRUCTURE OF AN OPEN SOURCE

One of my earliest conversations with a prominent member of the free software movement (who I’ll keep anonymous) involved him sputtering angrily at the idea that open source had anything to do with the developers who produce it. He told me that code is “anarchist” and “untouchable,” and that it must be able to survive beyond any one person’s

they do not want to spend time familiarizing themselves with a project’s goals, roadmap, and contribution process. These developers primarily see themselves as users

developers will find more software bugs when the process is highly participatory (like a “bazaar”), compared to when it’s restricted to a smaller group of developers (like a “cathedral”).

Early internet activity was characterized by large-scale, distributed online communities: mailing lists, online forums, membership groups. These communities operated as a cluster of villages, each with its own culture, history, and norms. Social platforms brought all these communities to one place and smashed them together like Play-Doh. In doing

Maintainers simply don’t have the energy to onboard every person who shows passing interest.