Yesterday someone who owns a product engaged in a comment on a thread and shared some information. That product has bugs open from 5 years ago **still**. Not to live in a glass house I should share that with ansible I had a terrible time getting the staff I needed.

however, there is no reason for projects that don't have a hostile management structure to have adequate staff to maintain their bug queue.

it is therefore surprising that we get what we get - the more 'welcoming' an open source project is to community help is, the less likely management is likely to properly invest in development and QA.

also, when a project changes architectures so many times, and has *complex* architectures when things should be simple, we have to ask, does anyone know what they are doing, or are they just wanting to be winning/selling?

the future thing is definitely going to be built on *stable* and *minimalistic* architecture. Nobody wants their outages to be murder mysteries.

so we get to what I was getting at - inexperienced vendors making up crazy architectures, constantly changing them, saying "you should be doing it this way", when the proper thing to do is "this is the most stable way to build this and it's built on proven tech & here it is"

they put some random engineers in charge of some component, let them do *whatever* and these folks are *NOT* running these architectures in prod. However, due to absense of good intra-company sharing...

we let these vendors become thought of as "experts" and they get a lot of following. It's super dumb. This is how we get cults in software.

anyway, I'd encourage everyone who uses some "open source" solution, see how many tickets are open. If it's more than a few hundred (and even that is bad), don't use the software.

it's almost always a sign the project in question has taken on more than it can chew and isn't staffed or organized, or they are getting tickets on things they don't understand.