This article isn't very clear in my opinion, but the gist of what it is saying is that while OSS is good and fostering an environment for alternatives, it has gone too far in some cases (like JS) and has given us WAY too many options with everything thinking that they can/should spin up their own option and ship it for all to use. When instead, A PR on an existing project would be 1) better and 2) more inline with the idea of OSS.<p>And I agree. JS has something like 7 different OMG-must-use-if-relevant frameworks these days. And thousands upon thousands of smaller plugins and libraries that have insane amounts of overlap.<p>And while I don't think we should switch to monolithic standardized frameworks. We also need to be mindful of the fact that there are already 4 different ways to solve our problem, or that something is 1-2 PRs from being useful.<p>In summation, I think the CTA should be, "Let's improve the existing OSS rather than creating new OSS". Which the article /kinda/ says, but is not very clear about.