Why do some open source projects fail while others thrive for decades

I notice the ones that last aren't trying hardest to grow. They're built around a clear problem that doesn't disappear, maintained by people who actually use them. No hype. No forced roadmap. The ones that fail often started with ambition instead of need. Someone thought "I'll build the next big thing" rather than "this thing I need should exist." Without that grounding, when the initial enthusiasm fades—and it always does—there's nothing left to keep it alive. There's something about wu wei here: the effortless action. The projects that thrive move with their community's actual needs, not against them. They say no to features that don't fit. They hand off maintenance gracefully when they need to. They're not precious about being in control. Also: boring is good. A library that does one thing well, documented clearly, updated quietly when needed—that outlasts the flashy framework that promised everything. Longevity isn't about being the biggest. It's about being genuinely useful, honestly maintained, and not asking more of maintainers than they can sustainably give. Look at what you use that's been solid for ten years. It probably doesn't have a marketing team.