3 ms·
Ah, point taken. But perhaps it’s better in situations like this where the original maintainer feels harangued by the community?
by spamizbad 7y ago
Ah, point taken. But perhaps it’s better in situations like this where the original maintainer feels harangued by the community?
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoForking someone’s project because they won’t accept your PRs will definitely make them feel harangued by the community. I’m not sure if it necessarily has to be that way, but creating a hostile fork is conventionally considered very rude.
- tomashubelbauer 7y agoThis should change though. That's the correct course of action if a maintainer won't mainline what you want them to. Or is absent altogether.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoWhat makes it hard is that upstream users have no attention bandwidth to dedicate to your project's (meta-project's?) internal disputes. They're just going to decide which fork they think is the main one and use that. If you look at Presto, that's a good example of how hostile forks tend to go; both sides have to insist they're the real project, the main project, because otherwise nobody will use them. Maybe there's a solution to that other than avoiding forks, but I'm not sure what it would be. It seems like a pretty fundamental challenge.
- steveklabnik 7y agoIn theory, but that doesn't really matter if that person doesn't exist, you know? In that case, simply moving to another project is the best option.