Even in a non-open-source tool, lots of users means lots of reference on Stack Overflow, and an exponentially better chance of not encountering bugs for your particular use-case.
Any framework of moderate size has bugs in it. The only question is, has the bug that would slow you down been fixed yet?
That's why the size of the alternative is so important. If the alternative is just 300 lines of code (as in this case), then even if you do run into bugs, fixing them is gonna be trivial. But what about 3,000 lines? 30,000? ...
I wouldn't say everybody should automatically go with the popular option, because this kind of herd mentality can really be destructive. If another, less popular tool seems better for your use, give it a fair consideration. I've actually personally chosen that route several times, and I would again. But by doing so you accept the strong possibility of dealing with bugs which your competition doesn't need to worry about.