@cerberus Isn't this is the entire point of the exercise - to effectively whittle down those who cannot walk the walk but can talk the talk ?? I've seen this before in one particular case where a candidate did very well on the interview, but simply awful on the technical testing.
You seem to be interested in what's here, but haven't registered for an account yet or perhaps haven't logged in.
When you create an account, we will be able to remember what you've already read, so you can pick up exactly where you left off when you come back.
Oh, and it'll also get rid of this really annoying box :)
What's the point of open source without contributors? Turns out, there are several
Commentary: Here are reasons to open source your code even if you don't want contributions.
Interesting topic. However, let’s look at the flip-side of the coin. Those open source projects with one sole developer carry inherent risks in the sense that same sole developer may suffer burnout, dwindling enthusiasm, boredom, or a lack of desire to continue without some form of incentive - usually financial, or sponsorship from a larger entity. In this sense, adopting open source for long term usage based on these principles can be dangerous, and leave you “high and dry” without solutions to any issues that arise.
However, the possibilities here are distinct in the sense that you can fork the project yourself, and assume the role of maintainer, or fork and bring in other resources to contribute / assist in future development. The overall point here is that organisations who may rely on open source software and are then faced with the project being abandoned, or worse still, no resources to assume responsibility could find themselves in a difficult situation.