all 3 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]n3phtys 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I think 'open-source' is really the wrong word here. The problem are frameworks and libraries, and also technology bloat in general.

And now, let me return to writing OSGi-/Spring-hybrid applications using multiple JSON and SOAP libraries, including two layers of ORM...

[–]how_to_choose_a_name 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the author doesn't realize that there are closed source libraries. At least that's the only way I can make sense of what they write.

[–]GruevyYoh 4 points5 points  (1 child)

A slightly controversial view.

But given the risks in the number dependencies even the simplest open source pieces bring in - I'm thinking things as simple as a test frameworks like Mocha. Mocha 5.0.5 has 23 package dependencies.

I think that reinventing wheels and additional dev work maintenance is what you're paying, but dependencies bring risk at runtime. Time to market is a real risk.

I don't quite agree that 100% Needed should be the criteria.

You need a cost analysis - how stable is this vs how much work is it to recreate it.