To be fair, open source is not a democracy. The project owners/authors/maintainers can do things because they feel like it or prefer it, without having to justi

To be fair, open source is not a democracy. The project owners/authors/maintainers can do things because they feel like it or prefer it, without having to justify it to anyone - even if everyone else openly hates it and the project loses users or contributors as a result. Some big projects have governance rules and committees where you could expect more through some bylaws or similar, but that is not the norm. The only right given to others in traditional open source is the ability to fork if you feel enough for it. Also note that many of the votes and comments are from HN, which might distort the view of the original disagreement. (I like neither JS nor TS, so eh.)