Just wanted to mention some bias in successful open source projects: they are often structured as a number of similar plug-in pieces, like youtube-dl for different video publishers.
This is great for open source, because you can easily discover and navigate to the part you want, and change it. You might need to understand the plugin interface - or you might not. This flat architecture makes it easy for people to contribute, an important aspect of a successful open source project.
But it's not the ideal architecture for every project. In some cases, a cleverer, harder to understand approach is more elegant, shorter, more efficient, simpler.
Of course... one might argue that ease of understanding is more important than anything else.
This is great for open source, because you can easily discover and navigate to the part you want, and change it. You might need to understand the plugin interface - or you might not. This flat architecture makes it easy for people to contribute, an important aspect of a successful open source project.
But it's not the ideal architecture for every project. In some cases, a cleverer, harder to understand approach is more elegant, shorter, more efficient, simpler.
Of course... one might argue that ease of understanding is more important than anything else.