4 ms·
> I'm dropping your software without a second thought. Ha, it sounds like more work to replace a free piece of software with something else than to use your ow
by evv 4y ago
> I'm dropping your software without a second thought.
Ha, it sounds like more work to replace a free piece of software with something else than to use your own patched version. Especially if you have to replace it with something inferior or proprietary. If there are better-maintained alternatives, why did you adopt it in the first place?
Pull requests take work to review and test. You shouldn't take that for granted and assume everything will be merged for free.
If you manage to review and test fixes faster than the original, or if you're willing to add features and maintain the code yourself, go and promote your fork!
- Arnavion 4y ago>Ha, it sounds like more work to replace a free piece of software with something else than to use your own patched version. Nonsense. You think signing yourself up to maintain a patched version of someone else's code for eternity is better than using someone else's code? You have to sign up for upstream CVEs, keep updating the upstream base and rebasing your patches on top. >Especially if you have to replace it with something inferior or proprietary. If there are better-maintained alternatives, why did you adopt it in the first place? False dichotomy. A library is measured in various dimensions - how well-maintained it is, what features it has, OS / hardware dependencies, performance, etc. Something that is better in one dimension might be worse in another dimension, so that there's no single objectively better library. >If you manage to review and test fixes faster than the original, or if you're willing to add features and maintain the code yourself, go and promote your fork! I have my own work to do, not maintain forks of other people's code.