I’m avoiding naming anything on purpose but it applies to many projects, some more than others.
Are you sure you’re looking at this without bias? Something tells me you’d be working on nostr with or without grants without worrying about money, which I can’t say about other devs who are replacing their income.
I have resources, but not as much to do this without any income.
It's hard to make an assessment on the bugs without knowing the project, but I can guarantee you that many (majority of) devs are not cut to finish projects, regardless of payment. If they spent one year and can't get a good-enough product out, where most users can use in inspite of the minor bugs left, money wasn't the issue.
I have good examples to support my point but I don’t want to single them out. Respect your opinion 🙇♂️
Interesting. I am glad I am not in any review committee :)
I agree with nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z in a painful way. My previous project Blowater was a failed attempt.
It’s not a time or funding problem. But a skill problem. But not just normal skill problems like programming or designing.
They were about meta skills such as “how to ship a product” and “how to plan a strategy”
Most indie devs were like me who only had worked as a specialist.
The meta skill can only be learned by doing the thing for a long time. Maybe it’s just hard in general for novices to achieve things independently.
If you had to start a new one what would you do differently this time?
There are many things. Start with:
Design the thing first instead of hacking right away
By designing, I mean both graphical design and software design.
Implementation is the easy part. Code is just an artifact. Don’t measure the progress by the size of code. Measure by user activities.
