Popularity on GitHub can open valuable doors for developers and startups. Underground stores sell “stars” on the platform, offering coders a way to literally fake it till they make it.
You can star repos. Mine have a few. No idea what it does and I didnt get any notificaitons for it when it happened. Jus figured it some irelevant feature.
Stars don’t really do that much, people mostly use it to “favorite” your repo.
That may be technically true, but sadly in reality things are more complicated.
Developers, especially bad ones, use Stars as an argument for choosing libraries or frameworks, for example. Organizations tend to favor those repositories / libraries / frameworks when picking their stacks. People in HR are trained to judge you Github account by the amount of stars that you have.
Open Source maintainers who appear popular are often used as poster people for recruiting. The list of ridiculous reasons why stars may matter goes on.
Eventually, you will be able to turn a repository with a high star count into money or advancement, because that just how superficial the world we live in actually functions under the hood.
I don’t think looking at the star counts makes you automatically a bad developer, but it certainly shouldn’t be the only thing you look at. If you’re unfamiliar with libraries solving a specific problem, I don’t see anything wrong with looking at them from the most to the least popular. Popularity can also be a sign of community and therefore more likely continued “support”
Github offers the Insights tab on every repository that provides you with actual data in those points. There are countless repositories out there that have thousands of stars and literally on person contributing to it. If you go by stars to sway your verdict, you are simply to lazy to do your due diligence which in turn makes you a bad developer.
Your claim is that there is value in using a metric that has zero meaning and validate your own negligence in claiming that it makes your choice better than random through popularity. I claim this is lazy and negligent. Please tell me what I misread.
Yea true, if people can vote on something, other people will use those votes as metrics for how good something is
My perspective was more about what they actually do. Not the meta-effects they might have socially
Eventually, you will be able to turn a repository with a high star count into money or advancement
I think you overestimate how much money or advancements you can really get from it though.
Money wise - I can’t find an overview of “Most Sponsored github repos” - but it’s pretty bare. I checked to see if I could find any example, for example if you look at FluentAssertions - A project that basically everyone uses, has 292.6 Million total downloads on Nuget. If you check their sponsers - they currently have 17. Assuming their the lowest tier, you’re getting $85 a month. Which is cool, I guess, but a neglectable amount for a developer with a normal job
And advancements wise - any actually good developer doesn’t really have a problem getting a good job - And any good company reviewing a candidate might fool the HR by buying stars, but a dev reviewer or something will actually look though the code won’t care much about stars
And advancements wise - any actually good developer doesn’t really have a problem getting a good job
True, but I’d assume developers who are actually good also don’t buy stars on Github. Sadly, the demand on the market over the last five to ten years meant that everyone with a udemi course in react could get job as a developer. Now that the economy does not look all that rosy, that is changing and people are looking for new ways to “boost” their CVs.
“Stars” are a measurement for popularity, and as we know from high school (or mainstream social media), more stars = more popular = more better in every way.
I’m sure we need a bot for lemmy or entire fediverse that will search posts like this 👆 and do comment with “normal” link. That will be great.
I saw something like that in the Masto for YouTube.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programming@programming.dev
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person’s post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you’re posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don’t want to watch videos
Been on GitHub for years now, mostly passive, and have never heard of “stars” people have or get.
You can star repos. Mine have a few. No idea what it does and I didnt get any notificaitons for it when it happened. Jus figured it some irelevant feature.
I use stars to keep a list of repositories I’m interested in. You can even put them in different categories, like browser bookmarks.
I’ve always just followed them, have it send emails when a new release happens or something.
You can “star” repositories on GitHub. I believe this has always been a feature.
Stars don’t really do that much, people mostly use it to “favorite” your repo. Or just a general “Upvote” or something
I have a repo with about 1.4k stars, so what it gives you:
Not sure if that affects other searches, like google
Even more stars (apparently like 5k+ or more) gives you
That may be technically true, but sadly in reality things are more complicated.
Developers, especially bad ones, use Stars as an argument for choosing libraries or frameworks, for example. Organizations tend to favor those repositories / libraries / frameworks when picking their stacks. People in HR are trained to judge you Github account by the amount of stars that you have. Open Source maintainers who appear popular are often used as poster people for recruiting. The list of ridiculous reasons why stars may matter goes on. Eventually, you will be able to turn a repository with a high star count into money or advancement, because that just how superficial the world we live in actually functions under the hood.
I don’t think looking at the star counts makes you automatically a bad developer, but it certainly shouldn’t be the only thing you look at. If you’re unfamiliar with libraries solving a specific problem, I don’t see anything wrong with looking at them from the most to the least popular. Popularity can also be a sign of community and therefore more likely continued “support”
Github offers the
Insightstab on every repository that provides you with actual data in those points. There are countless repositories out there that have thousands of stars and literally on person contributing to it. If you go by stars to sway your verdict, you are simply to lazy to do your due diligence which in turn makes you a bad developer.I’m literally writing that it’s not what I am doing, so please don’t talk to me about laziness when you can’t even read a three-sentence long comment.
Your claim is that there is value in using a metric that has zero meaning and validate your own negligence in claiming that it makes your choice better than random through popularity. I claim this is lazy and negligent. Please tell me what I misread.
Yea true, if people can vote on something, other people will use those votes as metrics for how good something is
My perspective was more about what they actually do. Not the meta-effects they might have socially
I think you overestimate how much money or advancements you can really get from it though.
Money wise - I can’t find an overview of “Most Sponsored github repos” - but it’s pretty bare. I checked to see if I could find any example, for example if you look at FluentAssertions - A project that basically everyone uses, has 292.6 Million total downloads on Nuget. If you check their sponsers - they currently have 17. Assuming their the lowest tier, you’re getting $85 a month. Which is cool, I guess, but a neglectable amount for a developer with a normal job
And advancements wise - any actually good developer doesn’t really have a problem getting a good job - And any good company reviewing a candidate might fool the HR by buying stars, but a dev reviewer or something will actually look though the code won’t care much about stars
True, but I’d assume developers who are actually good also don’t buy stars on Github. Sadly, the demand on the market over the last five to ten years meant that everyone with a udemi course in react could get job as a developer. Now that the economy does not look all that rosy, that is changing and people are looking for new ways to “boost” their CVs.
“Stars” are a measurement for popularity, and as we know from high school (or mainstream social media), more stars = more popular = more better in every way.
What the heck is this paywalled article doing here? That’s some reddit-level shit.
https://12ft.io
I’m sure we need a bot for lemmy or entire fediverse that will search posts like this 👆 and do comment with “normal” link. That will be great. I saw something like that in the Masto for YouTube.
Great idea for a project!
Is this supposed to be treated like an image? Doesn’t load for me on Sync
It’s a link to a paywall removing service/proxy. It should not show as an image.
I think you linked it wrong. Maybe try removing the
!Thanks for the heads-up. It was my lemmy client that did it.
It’s not paywalled here, try using porn mode, clearing that site’s cookies or something like archive.today.
Porn mode?!?
I mean yes but porn mode?
I thought that was catchier than “Private Browsing/Incognito/InPrivate/gift shopping mode”.
PORN MODE ON
I mean nice, but anyone with half a brain will take a look at the code and decide for their own if they’re a decent coder
Also there’s star graphs over time that show the growth of a project
Shitty companies hiring shitty employees sounds like a win win to me