Post

I'm just going to say it, I really don't like the "how do we make OSS sustainable" framing. OSS is already sustainable. The only thing not sustainable is users expecting a free lunch (support, LTS, bug fixes, ...). As a user, you are responsible for your OSS usage. Fork/patch if you need to.

OSS doesn't seem very sustainable for devs who don't do it on the side from their generous day job, or AS their day job. It's certainly nowhere near as lucrative as an average full-time SWE position for most maintainers - it's mostly synonymous with "volunteer" for people with less exceptional luck.

You are assuming that “sustainable” means “others manage bug fixes and releases for me for free”. I’m saying, OSS authors should just… not. Let users fork if they want. Unless they understand themselves why they are putting in the work.

The only assumption I'm consciously making was to expand the word sustainable to mean "sustainable to work on while needing regular food and housing". Not whether the code or project would experience longevity. Since if maintainers can't make ends meet, it's probably doomed in the long term.