DEV Community: Georgi Hristov

The Architecture Behind the Future of an Open-Source Project

Georgi Hristov — Sun, 07 Jun 2026 10:06:17 +0000

DebugProbe Architecture Overview

The diagram illustrates the vision behind DebugProbe Server and how it enables centralized monitoring across multiple environments and applications.

Current State

Today, DebugProbe.AspNetCore runs directly inside ASP.NET Core applications and provides a lightweight dashboard for inspecting:

Requests
Responses
Exceptions
Headers
Query parameters
Request and response bodies
Performance information

This works well for individual applications, but as systems grow, teams often need a centralized view across multiple environments.

Introducing DebugProbe Server

DebugProbe Server acts as a central collection hub for all connected DebugProbe instances.

Instead of opening separate dashboards for Development, Staging, and Production, applications can send their captured data to a single DebugProbe Server instance.

The server becomes the central place where teams can:

Monitor all environments
Review requests and exceptions
Compare behavior between environments
Troubleshoot issues faster
Manage multiple applications from one dashboard

Architecture Flow

                    debugprobe.server
                           │
        ┌──────────────────┼──────────────────┐
        │                  │                  │
   Development         Staging           Production
        │                  │                  │
   Client app         Client app         Client app  
        +                  +                  +
   debugprobe         debugprobe         debugprobe
  .aspnetcore        .aspnetcore        .aspnetcore

Each environment runs DebugProbe.AspNetCore locally and forwards diagnostic data to DebugProbe Server.

The server aggregates and displays all collected information through a unified dashboard.

Scaling Beyond One Application

The same architecture can support multiple applications.

                    debugprobe.server
                           │
        ┌──────────────────┴──────────────────┐
        │                                     │
      App 1                                App 2
  Dev / Stage / Prod                  Dev / Stage / Prod

This allows organizations to manage diagnostics for an entire portfolio of applications from a single platform.

Current Status

DebugProbe.AspNetCore

🟢 Available now and ready for production use.

Current Version: v1.6.2

Useful Links:

Website: https://debugprobe.dev
LiveDemo: https://demo.debugprobe.dev/debug
Documentation: https://debugprobe.dev/docs
GitHub: https://github.com/DebugProbe/DebugProbe
NuGet: https://www.nuget.org/packages/DebugProbe.AspNetCore

DebugProbe.Server

🚧 Currently under active development.

The first alpha release will focus on:

Centralized request collection
Exception monitoring
Environment management
Cross-environment comparison
Multi-application support

If you're interested in early access, you can subscribe via email on the DebugProbe website and get notified when alpha testing becomes available.

Goal

The goal is simple:

Keep DebugProbe.AspNetCore lightweight, simple, and easy to integrate while providing an optional server platform for teams that need centralized observability, environment comparison, and advanced diagnostics.

Email Subscription Update for DebugProbe

Georgi Hristov — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 08:14:17 +0000

A few hours ago I wrote about whether open source projects should start collecting emails early.

While working on the project today, I finished the first version of the email subscription feature.

The email subscription is now live on the DebugProbe website.

The goal is simple:

no marketing emails
no spam
no unnecessary notifications

Only important updates about:

new releases
major features
significant project updates

I'm still experimenting and learning, but I think having a direct way to reach people who are interested in the project is valuable.

If you're interested in following DebugProbe, you can now subscribe here:

Subscribe with DebugProbe

And if you read the original post, I'd still love to hear your thoughts on when projects should start building an email list.

The discussion is definitely still open.

Should Open Source Projects Start Collecting Emails Early?

Georgi Hristov — Fri, 05 Jun 2026 04:29:56 +0000

“A GitHub star is great. An email subscriber is someone you can reach directly.”

Lately I've been thinking about email lists and whether open source projects should start building one much earlier.

GitHub stars, downloads, website traffic, and social media followers are all useful metrics, but none of them give you a direct way to reach people who are interested in your project.

That's where email becomes interesting.

If someone voluntarily gives you their email address, they are usually interested enough to hear about:

new releases
important updates
major features
roadmap changes

And that feels much more valuable than a random website visit.

One question I'm currently asking myself is:

At what stage should a project start collecting emails?

Should it happen:

immediately after launch
after finding product-market fit
after reaching a certain number of users

I'm not sure there is a single correct answer.

For my own project, DebugProbe, I plan to collect emails through the project website.

The idea is simple.

Users can subscribe and receive updates only when something important happens around the project.

No marketing emails.
No spam.
Only meaningful updates.

Interestingly, I accidentally discovered another way to collect emails.

I published the project on Gumroad as a free product.

The project itself costs nothing, but Gumroad gives me one useful thing:

Information that someone was interested enough to download it.

That creates another channel for understanding who is actually engaging with the project.

And it made me wonder whether relying on a single source for collecting emails is enough.

Maybe projects should have multiple entry points:

website subscriptions
free downloads
newsletters
community signups

while still keeping everything simple and respectful.

Because at the end of the day, email feels different.

Algorithms change.
Social media platforms change.

But an email list remains a direct connection between a project and its audience.

Final Thought

I'm still very early in this journey, so I'd love to hear from developers who have already gone through it.

Do you think collecting emails is important for open source projects?

And if so, when is the right time to start?

At the moment, the only way to join the DebugProbe email list is through the free Gumroad page.

Support Beyond Code — I Didn't Expect This Kind of Support

Georgi Hristov — Tue, 02 Jun 2026 04:48:20 +0000

It took me some time to write this post, but now it says exactly what I wanted to say.

When people talk about open source contributions, we usually think about code.

You organize your repository, improve the documentation, create issues, and over time you hope someone will contribute.

But this wasn't what I expected.

One person helped my project without writing a single line of code.

We met here on DEV, and later continued our discussions on Discord.

He shared useful resources, gave organizational advice, introduced me to Conventional Commits, and helped me think more seriously about the long-term direction of the project.

The most surprising part is that this happened at a very early stage.

When your project is new, you're still trying to validate the idea itself and understand whether you're building something people actually find useful.

Then he spent hours reviewing the project and wrote a roadmap that aligned almost perfectly with what I wanted the project to become.

What's funny is that we hadn't even discussed many of the future ideas yet.

That roadmap is still one of the most valuable contributions the project has received so far.

Because of that, I decided to invite him as a member of the DebugProbe GitHub organization.

@gimi5555, thank you for allowing me to mention you here.

Thank you for the time, the advice, the honest feedback, and for becoming part of the DebugProbe journey so early.

Even with a 7-hour time difference and living on different continents, we connected through the same thing:

Building software.

And that's one of the things I like most about open source.

Thank you, man 🙏

The roadmap is 🔥

Roadmap

Discord: georgidhristov

Final Words

Open source contributions are not only about code.

Sometimes advice, feedback, organization, documentation, and simply helping someone stay on the right path can have an even bigger impact.

And those contributions deserve recognition too.

DebugProbe.AspNetCore — From a Debugging Experiment to an API Comparison Tool

Georgi Hristov — Sat, 30 May 2026 22:16:42 +0000

This is a submission for the GitHub Finish-Up-A-Thon Challenge

What I Built

DebugProbe.AspNetCore is an ASP.NET Core debugging and API comparison tool designed to help developers understand exactly how their applications behave across different environments.

It captures incoming requests, outgoing HTTP calls, headers, bodies, timings, exceptions, and middleware execution details through a lightweight web interface.

What makes the project different is its focus on API comparison.

Instead of manually inspecting logs from multiple environments, developers can compare requests side-by-side and quickly identify differences in responses, headers, payloads, status codes, and behavior.

The goal is simple:

Reduce the time required to answer one of the most common debugging questions:

"Why does this work in one environment but not in another?"

The project started as a personal tool because I was tired of manually comparing logs, requests, and responses when debugging production issues. Over time it evolved into a reusable open-source solution for ASP.NET Core developers.

Demo

Live Demo

https://demo.debugprobe.dev/debug

Demo API

https://demo.debugprobe.dev/swagger

Screenshots

Review Captured HTTP Traffic

Inspect Complete Request & Response Details

Compare API Behavior Across Environments

The Comeback Story

DebugProbe.AspNetCore started as a simple debugging experiment.

My original goal was straightforward: create a lightweight way to inspect requests and responses inside ASP.NET Core applications without relying on external tools.

The first versions worked, but over time I realized something important.

The debugging information itself was useful, but the most valuable part was comparing behavior.

Many production issues are not caused by obvious exceptions. They happen because an API behaves slightly differently between local development, staging, and production.

Different headers
Different payloads
Different status codes
Different downstream service responses

Developers often spend hours comparing logs manually to find these differences.

That realization changed the direction of the project.

Instead of building another request inspector, I started focusing on comparison workflows.

Over time the project evolved with:

Request and response inspection
API comparison capabilities
Outbound HttpClient tracing
Improved filtering and navigation
Better UI and usability
Documentation and examples
Live demo environment
Organized GitHub workflows
Continuous improvements based on community feedback

What began as a small debugging utility gradually became a more complete developer tool focused on understanding application behavior.

Today, DebugProbe.AspNetCore is a stable open-source project at version 1.6.0, with documentation, a live demo, regular releases, and a growing roadmap.

My Experience with GitHub Copilot

I primarily built DebugProbe.AspNetCore myself, while GitHub helped me organize the project through issues, pull requests, releases, discussions, and overall project management.

One lesson I learned while working on this project is that building the software is only part of the job.

Maintaining documentation, organizing issues, planning future work, tracking releases, and communicating project direction are all important parts of turning a repository into a real open-source project.

GitHub became the place where the project evolved from a collection of features into something more structured and maintainable.

This challenge gave me a chance to step back and look at how far the project has come.

The project is still evolving, but today it solves real problems for real ASP.NET Core developers.

And this is only the beginning.

What Makes You Instantly Trust a GitHub Repository?

Georgi Hristov — Thu, 28 May 2026 04:26:42 +0000

Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about this question.

Because when developers open a GitHub repository for the first time, they usually decide very quickly whether the project feels trustworthy or not.

And interestingly, it is often not only about the code itself.

Clean documentation, active maintenance, and clear project direction can completely change the first impression.

I also realized something interesting recently.

Nowadays, it is not only developers who evaluate repositories.

AI agents evaluate them too.

Yesterday I tested this with Grok using very detailed prompts around ASP.NET Core debugging tools.

After adding more context, it actually suggested my own project.

But when I asked why it did not recommend it earlier, one part of the answer was especially interesting:

“Well-established, actively maintained, reliable, stable, and usually 2–5+ years old.”

That made me realize something important.

Time itself becomes part of trust.

Not only:

features
performance
design

but also:

consistency over time
maintenance history
community activity
long-term stability

And honestly, that makes sense.

A project that survives and improves consistently for years naturally becomes easier to trust.

Especially now when both developers and AI systems increasingly rely on reputation and long-term signals.

Final Thought

Maybe trust in open source is not built through one big feature release.

Maybe it is built slowly through consistency over time.

What makes you instantly trust a GitHub repository?

How to Set Realistic Goals for an Open Source Project?

Georgi Hristov — Wed, 27 May 2026 04:40:31 +0000

“Without clear goals, projects can slowly lose focus over time.”

Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about what the right goals for an open source project should actually look like.

Because I think many developers set goals around:

stars
traffic
downloads
popularity

but not enough around things like focus, simplicity, maintainability, and long-term direction.

And maybe those are the goals that matter more in the beginning.

For my own project, one of my main goals is to keep the tool:

minimal
simple
lightweight
focused on solving one problem really well

instead of trying to become another all-in-one platform.

I also think every project needs one strongest feature that clearly differentiates it from competitors.

Something where users immediately think:

“This tool is especially good at this.”

Without that identity, many projects eventually start feeling generic.

Another thing I’m thinking about is locking a fixed time period first and only reviewing the project after that period ends.

For example:

3 months
6 months
maybe even 1 year

And after that comparing the results against a few competitors more objectively in areas like:

simplicity
feature coverage
usability
growth
community activity

I think this gives a much more realistic picture than constantly watching daily stars or traffic numbers.

I would actually love advice from developers who already maintain long-term projects.

Does this sound like a good way to measure progress?

And what time period do you think makes the most sense for smaller or beginner open source projects?

Final Thought

Maybe realistic goals are not about building the biggest project possible.

Maybe they are about building something focused, maintainable, and genuinely useful over time.

MIT vs Apache 2.0 — Most Developers Choose a License Without Really Thinking About It

Georgi Hristov — Tue, 26 May 2026 04:30:24 +0000

“I used to think choosing a license was just picking MIT and moving on.”

Recently I spent time researching open source licenses more seriously while working on my own project.

And honestly, I realized many developers probably choose a license without fully understanding the differences.

The two licenses I kept comparing were:

MIT
Apache 2.0

At first they look very similar because both are permissive open source licenses.

Both allow:

commercial usage
modification
distribution
private usage

But there are still important differences.

MIT License

MIT is extremely simple and short.

It basically says:

people can use your code freely
modify it
distribute it
include it in commercial software

as long as the original license and copyright notice stay included.

That simplicity is one of the reasons MIT is so popular.

Apache 2.0

Apache 2.0 is more detailed and adds additional legal protections.

The biggest difference is patent protection.

Apache 2.0 includes an explicit patent license, which helps protect contributors and users from certain patent-related legal issues.

It also provides clearer rules around modifications and contributions.

So while MIT feels simpler, Apache 2.0 feels more structured and safer for larger long-term projects.

So Which One Is Better?

Honestly, I do not think there is one correct answer.

MIT is great for:

very small libraries
simple utilities
projects where maximum simplicity matters

Apache 2.0 makes more sense for:

larger open source projects
long-term maintained software
projects expecting contributors
projects where legal clarity matters more

Why I Chose Apache 2.0 for DebugProbe

For DebugProbe, I decided to use Apache 2.0 mainly because I want the project to grow long term and potentially involve more contributors over time.

The additional patent protection and clearer contribution rules simply felt like a safer choice.

Before researching this properly, I honestly underestimated how important licensing decisions can become later.

I think many developers focus heavily on:

architecture
performance
features
design

but spend almost no time thinking about licensing until much later.

And maybe that is a mistake.

Final Thought

Choosing an open source license is probably more important than many developers initially think.

Especially if the project is intended to grow long term.

Every App Needs a Recognizable Identity

Georgi Hristov — Mon, 25 May 2026 16:01:48 +0000

Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about something that feels much harder than building features itself:

Giving your app a strong identity.

Not just what it does, what tech it uses, or how many features it has. But the thing people instantly associate it with.

Some products are remembered immediately because their identity is very clear.

Docker:

“Run apps anywhere.”

Sentry:

“Error monitoring.”

Wireshark:

“Network protocol analyzer.”

You hear the name and instantly understand the problem they solve.

And I think this is what makes products memorable.

Today I realized something important about my own project, DebugProbe.AspNetCore.

I don’t think the identity should be:

request inspector
HTTP logger
debugging dashboard

Those already exist everywhere.

But during discussions and thinking more deeply about the project, one sentence stayed in my head:

“Oh, DebugProbe is the tool for this.”

And I think “this” is:

“The fastest way to compare API behavior across environments.”

That comparison workflow feels like the real direction for the project.

So now I think I need to invest much more into making that functionality stronger instead of trying to build too many unrelated features.

Still early, but honestly this feels like the first time the project started getting a clearer identity in my head.

Managing Documentation Across README, Website, and Demo

Georgi Hristov — Sun, 24 May 2026 07:39:50 +0000

“At some point, documentation starts feeling like a second project.”

Yesterday I spent time updating my project website and reorganizing parts of the documentation.

Right now I am trying to keep the main README.md clean and focused while moving more detailed information to the project website.

But honestly, the more the project grows, the harder this becomes.

After every new feature or improvement, it starts feeling like I need to update:

the main README
additional README file for the NuGet package
the website documentation
the live demo project

And keeping all of that updated and aligned over time is becoming harder.

I also noticed that very large READMEs become difficult to maintain and difficult to read. They turn into huge walls of text that overwhelm new contributors and users.

So lately I have been thinking that maybe the README should only:

explain the project quickly
show minimal setup
provide simple examples
link to detailed documentation externally

And maybe everything else belongs on the website instead.

Still trying to figure out the best long-term approach honestly.

This is the current README structure I am experimenting with:
https://github.com/DebugProbe/DebugProbe.AspNetCore/blob/main/README.md

How do you organize documentation in your projects without constantly duplicating information everywhere?

Skipped my daily post yesterday to prepare this one better. This time I wrote about open source maintenance and the skills behind it. https://dev.to/georgi_hristov/are-strong-development-skills-enough-to-manage-an-open-source-project-28gk

Georgi Hristov — Thu, 21 May 2026 07:28:36 +0000

Georgi Hristov

May 21

Are Strong Development Skills Enough to Manage an Open Source Project?

#discuss #opensource #productivity #github

Comments 1

2 min read

Are Strong Development Skills Enough to Manage an Open Source Project?

Georgi Hristov — Thu, 21 May 2026 04:18:27 +0000

“The short answer is no.

Open source maintenance requires much more than writing good code.”

When I first started thinking about open source, I believed strong development skills were probably the most important thing.

Now I honestly think they are only one part of the process.

Because after some point, maintaining an open source project becomes less about coding and more about managing everything around the code.

And that part is much harder than many people expect.

1. Organization Skills

A project can quickly become chaotic without structure.

Things like:

labels
issue organization
pull request management
project structure
naming consistency

all matter much more over time.

A clean repository makes contributors feel more comfortable participating.

2. Planning

Not every feature should be added immediately.

One of the hardest things is deciding:

what to build
what to delay
what to reject completely

Without planning, projects can easily become over-engineered and difficult to maintain.

3. Communication

This is probably one of the most underrated skills in open source.

Maintainers constantly communicate through:

discussions
documentation
feedback
issues
pull requests

Good communication helps contributors feel welcome and keeps discussions productive.

4. Consistency

I think consistency is one of the hardest parts.

Many developers can work extremely hard for a few days.

But maintaining steady progress for months is much more difficult.

Open source projects grow slowly most of the time.

Consistency matters more than motivation.

5. Documentation

Good documentation saves enormous amounts of time.

Without documentation:

contributors get confused
setup becomes difficult
issues repeat constantly
onboarding becomes painful

Sometimes writing documentation is just as important as writing code.

6. Patience

This one is extremely important.

Growth is usually slow.
Contributors may come slowly.
Feedback may take time.

And sometimes you spend hours working on something that gets almost no attention at all.

Open source requires patience much more than people realize.

7. Development Skills Still Matter

Of course, technical skills are still very important.

You still need:

architecture knowledge
debugging skills
clean code practices
security awareness
performance thinking

But strong code alone usually is not enough to build a healthy long-term project.

Final Thought

I think many people underestimate how difficult it is for one person to manage everything alone.

Coding is only one part of maintaining an open source project.

The larger the project becomes, the more important the non-technical skills become too.

And honestly, I am still learning a lot of this myself.