6 ms·

Another side of this story https://twitter.com/sitnikcode/status/1441824191624486924 https://twitter.com/sitnikcode/status/1441824191624486924 Also at the end

by iskin 5y ago

Another side of this story https://twitter.com/sitnikcode/status/1441824191624486924 https://twitter.com/sitnikcode/status/1441824191624486924 Also at the end Colorette’s author back-ported Nano Colors performance optimizations, but this time he refuse to mention another developer. https://github.com/jorgebucaran/colorette/issues/78 https://github.com/jorgebucaran/colorette/issues/78

detaro 5y ago
Wow, that second link is incredibly petty. makes ai look even worse.
- ergocoder 5y ago
  Why? Colorette clearly copies that line from nanocolors, no? And he incorporated it into his benchmark to show that colorette is as fast as nanocolor. It sounds like an important optimization. If this wasn't copied, colorette would have been objectively worse than nanocolor.
  - detaro 5y ago
    > Why? Colorette clearly copies that line from nanocolors, no? And he copied the entire source code earlier and didn't mind hiding who wrote that? But now suddenly a tiny fix (which might be tiny and obvious enough to not even meet any copyright standard, although that's always vague and difficult) is worthy of demanding attribution for? That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy. (Would a mention in the commit message have been really good style anyways? yes.)
    - iskin 5y ago
      Nano Colors is mentioning Colorette in docs, COPYRIGHT and keep git history. If Nano Colors are following all Colorette’s author asks, why he didn’t do it in return?
    - ergocoder 5y ago
      > And he copied the entire source code earlier and didn't mind hiding who wrote that? I agree with you here, but aren't we talking about something else? > But now suddenly a tiny fix It's an impactful fix. Now colorette can claim that there's no performance difference between colorette and nanocolors. If this fix wasn't there, colorette would be objectively slower than nanocolors. If I am the user, I will choose the one that is faster, so this is an important improvement. > is worthy of demanding attribution for? Yes. Are you against both attributing each other accurately? Nanocolors currently attributes colorette for the whole fork (albeit after being called out). Colorette still refuses to attribute nanocolors specifically for this important performance improvement, even after being called out. > That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy. Why not? The current topic is about improper attribution. It's fair to look at improper attribution on both sides, not just one side.
      - iskin 5y ago
        > albeit after being called out Nano Colors mentioned Colorette in docs and Colorette author in LICENSE before Twitter thread. Colorette’s author asked m and I add the mention and agreed on the text.
        ergocoder 5y ago
        Thank you for clarification. Would you mind providing proof of this? It seems many other comments claiming that attribution is only provided after being called out.
        iskin 5y ago
        Sure. The first note was added 5 days ago https://www.npmjs.com/package/nanocolors/v/0.1.2 https://www.npmjs.com/package/nanocolors/v/0.1.2 Seems like people are confused by git rebase which change commit time in GitHub.
- rnotaro 5y ago
  You were probably not aware when you sent your reply but you literally replied to ai. iskin on HN is Andrey Sitnik (ai).

by iskin 5y ago

detaro 5y ago

Wow, that second link is incredibly petty. makes ai look even worse.

ergocoder 5y ago
Why? Colorette clearly copies that line from nanocolors, no? And he incorporated it into his benchmark to show that colorette is as fast as nanocolor. It sounds like an important optimization. If this wasn't copied, colorette would have been objectively worse than nanocolor.
- detaro 5y ago
  > Why? Colorette clearly copies that line from nanocolors, no? And he copied the entire source code earlier and didn't mind hiding who wrote that? But now suddenly a tiny fix (which might be tiny and obvious enough to not even meet any copyright standard, although that's always vague and difficult) is worthy of demanding attribution for? That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy. (Would a mention in the commit message have been really good style anyways? yes.)
  - iskin 5y ago
    Nano Colors is mentioning Colorette in docs, COPYRIGHT and keep git history. If Nano Colors are following all Colorette’s author asks, why he didn’t do it in return?
  - ergocoder 5y ago
    > And he copied the entire source code earlier and didn't mind hiding who wrote that? I agree with you here, but aren't we talking about something else? > But now suddenly a tiny fix It's an impactful fix. Now colorette can claim that there's no performance difference between colorette and nanocolors. If this fix wasn't there, colorette would be objectively slower than nanocolors. If I am the user, I will choose the one that is faster, so this is an important improvement. > is worthy of demanding attribution for? Yes. Are you against both attributing each other accurately? Nanocolors currently attributes colorette for the whole fork (albeit after being called out). Colorette still refuses to attribute nanocolors specifically for this important performance improvement, even after being called out. > That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy. Why not? The current topic is about improper attribution. It's fair to look at improper attribution on both sides, not just one side.
    - iskin 5y ago
      > albeit after being called out Nano Colors mentioned Colorette in docs and Colorette author in LICENSE before Twitter thread. Colorette’s author asked m and I add the mention and agreed on the text.
      - ergocoder 5y ago
        Thank you for clarification. Would you mind providing proof of this? It seems many other comments claiming that attribution is only provided after being called out.
        iskin 5y ago
        Sure. The first note was added 5 days ago https://www.npmjs.com/package/nanocolors/v/0.1.2 https://www.npmjs.com/package/nanocolors/v/0.1.2 Seems like people are confused by git rebase which change commit time in GitHub.
rnotaro 5y ago
You were probably not aware when you sent your reply but you literally replied to ai. iskin on HN is Andrey Sitnik (ai).