From a07dd29b9e5857b4a3412e7b175abd30e27742d2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steve Wirt Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 20:14:59 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Ignore long heading line. --- common-practices-tools/contribution/contrib-first.md | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/common-practices-tools/contribution/contrib-first.md b/common-practices-tools/contribution/contrib-first.md index d6477997f5..bebd5568df 100644 --- a/common-practices-tools/contribution/contrib-first.md +++ b/common-practices-tools/contribution/contrib-first.md @@ -52,7 +52,9 @@ Not typically. There are three significant offsets that make Contrib First the m Generally speaking, no it does not cost more. In total cost of ownership, contributed code is less expensive to maintain than custom code. Contributed code usually gets updated by update bots when there are changes needed. They make issues and merge requests automatically. The same code existing as custom code has to be updated by project personnel when the need for a change is discovered. In addition, with a broader user base, Open Source community members are more likely to uncover bugs or inefficiencies and provide improvements. + ## How de we decide between what is worth contributing and what is too specific to a project to have more general appeal? + Our engineers are pretty good at recognizing opportunities to re-use their work across multiple projects. This is especially true in the Government sector where agencies often have similar requirements. If we have even a hint that multiple agencies could benefit, we build it as contributed code first. If it starts out as something so specific to a given project that it can no be generalized, the we build it as custom code for that project. However we continually re-evaluate our custom code to see if, over time, it has become something that is worth contributing.