zlacker

>>Philpa+(OP)
This is a good description of what life is like working on almost any significant open source project. The only thing not included was the comments from overly entitled users that saps whatever morale and energy you have left. Probably best he did not include that though as that is what all discussion would be about.

I am not sure what to do about the burnout problem. The way he described it is very on point though. Since everyone working on the project is overloaded there is a great feeling of things only get done if you do them.

Most of my open source work was in the pre-GitHub days when we used mailing lists, not pull requests, to build community. I do think there was something better about that for the project itself as it encouraged a lot more discussion and community building. PR's and Issues become silos and are not great for general discussion. I think they also encourage drive-by contributions which honestly are intoxicating initially but once you see people are not coming back become defeating.

>>markph+H4
I think, from observation, that the Rust project has worse burnout problems than most other similarly-sized open source projects.

I'm not sure whether it's more to do with the way the project is organised, the state of the codebase, or the sort of person that's attracted to working on Rust in the first place.

>>mjw100+j8
> the sort of person that's attracted to working on Rust in the first place

What's that even supposed to hint at?

>>pdimit+We
I was thinking something along the lines of people who tend to set unusually high standards for themselves.

Rust has something of a self-image of always being best-of-breed in everything it attempts, so I could believe that it might be particularly attractive to those sorts.

Other possibilities might be that Rust developers skew younger than average (I don't know whether that's true), or that its six-week release cycle attracts people who think that a year is a long time.

>>mjw100+Cg
> people who tend to set unusually high standards for themselves

I would agree, at least I am like that when using Rust (though I don't contribute).

And it's true that this is a shortcut to burnout.

> or that its six-week release cycle attracts people who think that a year is a long time

I don't speak for the Rust project but to me this always sounded like a measure to avoid stagnation. Having six week slices helps remind people that this is not only a labor of love; many people out there are counting on you to get your stuff right.

Obviously Rust isn't governed like a commercial project (and thank the gods for that) and obviously many things still take years to complete but for me at least the six weeks release cycle would serve as a periodical poking a la "Hey, is your stuff progressing even a little?".

Don't know though, could be just my interpretation.

>>pdimit+Wh
From the outside, the Rust project seems to be governed like a government project. Is that markedly better?

Linux shows us at least one way to run a successful long term project. What is their governance model?