Name the project and point us at the repo. We watch the commits and draft the issue you would have written. Your host, your license, your code. We only publish the story.
The feed
This is what a living project looks like.
Each card is a changelog issue, written from commits. Filter by kind, open a profile, or keep scrolling.
You can, and most maintainers will not. Writing about the work competes with doing the work and loses. We remove the writing, not the publishing.
Why pay to promote free software?
The moment you want users or contributors, you are doing distribution, in hours or in money. A monthly changelog written by hand costs one to three hours. $12 buys those hours back. The code stays under your license.
Will anyone read it?
A personal blog starts at zero every time. Here the issue lives in a directory of open source projects, and subscribers stay on the project page. Each later issue reaches them without another launch post.
Is paying for this against the spirit of open source?
Open source is a license, not a vow of silence. You are paying for communication tooling, the same category as CI or a domain. We never touch the repo or the license.
What happens if the repo goes quiet?
Pause the plan. The project page and subscribers stay. A weekly plan on a quiet repo should downshift, not publish thin issues.
Show them it's alive.
Register a repo. The first draft is built from your commits. You keep building. The feed keeps showing up.