4 ms·
You could have cloned, made proposed changes to the source, pushed and made a pull request. Then, referenced it here, made the same point and provided the solut
by racerror 9y ago
You could have cloned, made proposed changes to the source, pushed and made a pull request. Then, referenced it here, made the same point and provided the solution with the same amount of effort as your English-only criticism.
- leblancfg 9y agoI don't think it's fair to ask of a stranger to take the time to fix someone else's cheat cheat if he's never going to use it. The criticism still holds, however.
- racerror 9y agoI agree with you. The point I was making, albeit poorly, was open-source is awesome. git, github and pull requests make it even better. When someone contributes something that may be half-baked and someone else comes along to critique it. A pull-request that demonstrates the solution can be an equally efficient means of communicating the same criticism. Meanwhile, the whole community reaps the benefit of that effort. TLDR; OSS devs should favor, "showing the way" and github makes that easy.