I am judging it by the comments. I have been on both sides of this situation over the years, but it was never too extreme. On the maintainer side: I have a sm

I am judging it by the comments. I have been on both sides of this situation over the years, but it was never too extreme. On the maintainer side: I have a small project that has picked up some pace recently, though is still rather small, and there has been only two situations where i said “this feature is not going in no matter what”. Because it will increase my burden as a maintainer and main author. On the contributor side: If the maintainer in a timely fashion suggests some changes that seem reasonable, I am happy to spend the time doing them. Often they will give an “outside” view that will make a patch better. Sometimes I saw them being quite selective about what they want to merge, whereas for me “just that bit” solves a real need and I see the request as too much work - then I just leave my fork as is and use that for what I needed. I see their rationale, and I am thankful for what they have done. And I leave my modifications in the fork in case someone needs them or wants to pick them up and improve. The freedom with open source always should go both ways.