3 ms·

Bullying open-source developers is not exactly the best course of action if one aims for the better adoption of a particular project. It is good that the situat

Bullying open-source developers is not exactly the best course of action if one aims for the better adoption of a particular project. It is good that the situation was somewhat resolved, but I still feel sorry for the original developer, and I am not sure if I would want to use Actix after "the community" (at least some awful parts of it) did such outrageous things to the developer.

turbinerneiter 6y ago
The "Community" that harassed the developer is probably not the same community that now works on the code. These mofos from Reddit who storm a GitLab ticket after it was posted there usually do not actually contribute to Open Source projects. They are pseudos who run their mouth but don't do the work. They are the ones who set up the wiki, but never write a single line of code.
- gnur 6y ago
  Honestly, the ones that set up a wiki but not the code are at least as valuable as the ones writing the code.
  - throwaway744678 6y ago
    At most as valuable. A Wiki without any code doesn't bring much value.
hobofan 6y ago
Was it in your opinion the "actix community" that piled onto the developer? Because from my perception it was more of the "unsafe Rust code is the devil community", which wasn't really using actix much beforehand. With that as a background you would be "punishing" the project for actions outside their core community (and control).
- rat9988 6y ago
  "actix community" and "unsafe Rust code is the devil community" are not mutually exclusive.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    The overlap is tiny. Usually the latter group are just groupies. Few of them contribute.
hocuspocus 6y ago
This is a pretty one-sided recollection of events. The main issue was caused by actix-web's adoption outgrowing the original author's goals. It should have been a good thing and there were better ways to deal with the situation, like encouraging the community to fork the project. (And what happened in the end is the opposite, he forked his own projects and clearly labeled them as being personal). You cannot have it both ways, if you create an org on GitHub, a website, speak as a team "we"... seeing adoption will bring some expectations from your users and contributors, that are typically not just to beat other frameworks at TechEmpower benchmarks. I don't think many people want to use a performance experiment. To be clear, I'm sure he also received a lot of unwarranted criticism, but that happens everywhere. It doesn't justify being hostile to legit contributions.

turbinerneiter 6y ago

The "Community" that harassed the developer is probably not the same community that now works on the code. These mofos from Reddit who storm a GitLab ticket after it was posted there usually do not actually contribute to Open Source projects. They are pseudos who run their mouth but don't do the work. They are the ones who set up the wiki, but never write a single line of code.

gnur 6y ago
Honestly, the ones that set up a wiki but not the code are at least as valuable as the ones writing the code.
- throwaway744678 6y ago
  At most as valuable. A Wiki without any code doesn't bring much value.

hobofan 6y ago

Was it in your opinion the "actix community" that piled onto the developer? Because from my perception it was more of the "unsafe Rust code is the devil community", which wasn't really using actix much beforehand. With that as a background you would be "punishing" the project for actions outside their core community (and control).

rat9988 6y ago
"actix community" and "unsafe Rust code is the devil community" are not mutually exclusive.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  The overlap is tiny. Usually the latter group are just groupies. Few of them contribute.

hocuspocus 6y ago

This is a pretty one-sided recollection of events. The main issue was caused by actix-web's adoption outgrowing the original author's goals. It should have been a good thing and there were better ways to deal with the situation, like encouraging the community to fork the project. (And what happened in the end is the opposite, he forked his own projects and clearly labeled them as being personal). You cannot have it both ways, if you create an org on GitHub, a website, speak as a team "we"... seeing adoption will bring some expectations from your users and contributors, that are typically not just to beat other frameworks at TechEmpower benchmarks. I don't think many people want to use a performance experiment. To be clear, I'm sure he also received a lot of unwarranted criticism, but that happens everywhere. It doesn't justify being hostile to legit contributions.