Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45093947

Points: 4

# Comments: 1

1: https://aider.chat/

The article doesn't bring up any critical issue that the world world opensource should suddenly deal with - feels more like a morning rant after his shower - which is also how the post starts - it's basically on the front-page because its title is trying to be provocative.

"if someone had an idea you believed in" but didn't have any meaningful contribution to its realisation? Well, if you are going to build everything, why bother partner with them.

- "How do you vet a potential partner?" Test the trust on simple things, do they acknowledge their own error? Do they pay their share (either in sweat or cash)? Do they lie? It doesn't have to be hardcore, but with the wrong people it is.

- "Is it possible to partner early without formal agreements?" Sure, but again, with or without contracts, it all comes down to relationships. Contracts are a fail-safe, in case things goes wrong. Having a contract doesn't mean people will abide by the contract. When things go wrong, a contract is nothing more than a piece of paper that can use in court. Until you go to court and judgement is made people can do a lot of things that have nothing to do with the contract.

That's why the more important thing you need when partnering with someone is a healthy approach to work and a good relationship.

In general it is hard to find a good partner, especially for a first venture, it is easier when you have a network and people you worked with in a client relationship, and then they usually bring more to the table than sweat equity, or pure cash.

True of democracy, True in the business-world, True in religion, True in philosophy... People are not code, so open source can define a licence but when people are interacting with each other, there will always be problematic people.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43619825

Points: 1

# Comments: 0