1. 2
  1.  

  2. 17

    I’m not sure I like the idea of using Github stars as a metric for which to optimize.

    1. 4

      I’m quite sure I do not.

    2. 14

      This has to be on top of the list of vanity metrics.

      1. 15

        If anything, this article proves GitHub stars are useless.

        However, there is some merit to this article:

        Unfortunately, we were affected by cognitive bias: old code is bad code. But the truth can be the opposite. The old code is battle-tested by thousands of users in hundreds of different projects. Most of the critical bugs have been fixed, the documentation is complete, there are tons of questions and answers on StackOverflow and Quora.

        Wish more people thought this way!

        1. 10

          See also: “How we got 1,500 twitter favorites by posting a picture of a president in a Moses basket.”

          Can we stop with click bait titles, and techniques for getting your project noticed, and just actually write software that solves problems people have?

          1. 5

            Can we stop with click bait titles, and techniques for getting your project noticed, and just actually write software that solves problems people have?

            I actually thought this turned out to be an insightful post. Solving a problem, but not having anybody know about it is a problem that leads to duplicated effort. The author admits the title is pandering for attention, but I think folks around these parts are really quick to judge books by their covers… err… posts by their titles.

            1. 3

              Yeah, my comment isn’t directed at this post so much as it is the general theme of “I need to market the hell out of my project.” The fact that the author choose a clickbait-y title took away from the otherwise legitimate post, which is sad.

            2. 4

              I’m with soulcutter where author did a clickbait title but post was interesting. Still worth it for some of us. Although, author might also think 1,500 Github stars is a trophy signaling to others the post is objectively worthwhile. It may even be in the circles author stays in: “hipsters” throwing JS and web frameworks at everything. Stuff like that gets a lot of attention of Github where social signaling of stars might provide benefit for anyone contributing something similar. Network effects.

              For us, we can just ignore that irrelevant part of the title (Github stars) to look straight to the content: specific example of “mixing time-tested technology with a fresh UI.” That phrase has a chance to become a good meme of lots of cleaned up projects (cough GPG UI cough). I’m not holding my breath on it, though.

              1. 2

                Can we stop complaining about click bait titles and just actually write comments about the content?

              2. 5

                I like how everyone pretends they don’t care how many stars their projects have.

                1. 4

                  From reading this post, I gather what they made is a prettier shell around the GraphQL Visualizer project. But their README only mentions that Voyager was “inspired” by Visualizer, way way down at the very bottom. And they would seem to be in violation of the other project’s MIT license by stripping out its copyright notice. Not cool.