fernvenue

Recently, I noticed that one of my personal projects was mentioned in a blog post—but only mentioned. The author skipped actually trying it, simply because it "hasn’t been updated in a while." The thing is, I’m quite confident my project would’ve worked just fine for their use case.

This made me wonder: I haven't updated it not because it's abandoned, but because there's nothing that really needs changing. It's stable and does what it's supposed to do.

I’ve had similar experiences before—when recommending a GitHub repo to someone, if they see it hasn’t been updated in months, their first question is usually: “Is this still working?” I then have to explain that yes, it still works.

Even large projects face this problem. If a popular repo goes a few months without commits, someone will inevitably open an issue asking: “Is this project still maintained?”

So I’m curious—how do you deal with this perception? Should we add notes in every README saying “This project is stable and doesn’t need updates”? Or is this just something that changes slowly over time as people better understand open source dynamics? Or, worst of all, should we start pushing out unnecessary updates just to show activity?