At what point does a product cease to bear the stigma of "self-written"?

fenric2019-02-19 18:37:55

fenric, 2019-02-19 18:37:55

Actually, the question is clear from the title, I want to know the opinions of people, at what point do you stop considering some product as self-made and (or) a bicycle? What needs to be done so that people do not consider such a product as such? Should 100 people write a product? The product must have more than 1k stars on github? What is your opinion on this matter?

Answer the question

In order to leave comments, you need to log in

10 answer(s)

Alexander Aksentiev, 2019-02-19
@Sanasol

self-written != self-written bicycle
= completely written for the needs of the project, usually from scratch i.e. not on vrotpress or joomla is worth it.
this does not carry any negative assessment, rather, on the contrary, it shows the uniqueness of the project in terms of functionality and therefore it was written for themselves with a certain list of functions.

Saboteur, 2019-02-19
@saboteur_kiev

It's a dumb question, and there's no point in discussing it.
Initially, all products are self-written, do not consider this a stigma.
The question is basically how the product can be used for a mass audience.

Dmitry Dart, 2019-02-19
@gobananas

Not self-written - contains a maximum of standard solutions and ready-made libraries.
Everything else is self-written.

ipokos, 2019-02-19
@ipokos

I doubt that the question can be given a definitive answer.
I consider self-writing what is done by a "jack of all trades", myself and a PM and a layout designer and a backend and SEO and an architect and a BA, etc.

Moskus, 2019-02-19
@Moskus

You don't seem to understand the meaning of these terms.
A bicycle is something that is developed independently, despite the existence of products with the same functionality. As a rule, a bicycle is worse than analogues. If a product has significant unique functionality, it is no longer a bicycle.
A self-written product is something that is independently developed strictly for your needs. It can be "bicycle", but it doesn't have to be. More often, it is simply a product that solves a specific internal problem of the company and is not published as open source.
If the first term still has an abusive connotation, then the second one is definitely completely neutral.

Alexander Sinitsyn, 2019-02-19
@a_u_sinitsin

The question is as old as the world ... here is actually one of the examples of two "samopis" and how their quality depends on the hands that make them ...)))
https://youtu.be/BYQgUq1QVMA?t=272

yayashitoya, 2019-02-20
@yayashitoya

The product is alienable.
As long as no one is fully able to work with it without developers-creators - "this is a self-written".

TheAthlete, 2019-02-20
@TheAthlete

Here it is correct to say not the stigma of "self-written", it is essentially Open Source in its purest form. Those. you needed some functionality on the project, you looked at ready-made implementations, didn’t find what you needed, wrote your own, started using it on your project, posted it on Github. Those. any such project that implements some kind of functionality can be called self-written in a good way. The question is whether this project solves some problem in production or just for "playing around". If the module is used in production, then in general everything is OK, if for "playing around", studying the technology, it's also normal.
In other words, the main criterion is the use and solution of specific problems in production, the use of this module by several developers.