3 ms·
This is when I lose all sympathy for the OP. All of it. Misrepresenting the actual statement this way is garbage. There's a world of difference in the two state
by jzb 3y ago
This is when I lose all sympathy for the OP. All of it. Misrepresenting the actual statement this way is garbage. There's a world of difference in the two statements.
I do understand why people clamor to get a patch into the kernel. It's a big deal. Feeling like you've come close and fallen short has to sting.
But, part of having a patch accepted is being able to work with maintainers. Clear fail here. There's a definite air of entitlement in claiming that you're "robbed" of a patch and misrepresenting other people's words and actions.
- bogwog 3y ago> Misrepresenting the actual statement this way is garbage. There's a world of difference in the two statements. That's debatable. What's not debatable is that not giving OP credit for the fix is disrespectful and bordering on plagiarism. Even if OP's patch wasn't as good as the final one (and giving OP feedback + time to improve their patch themselves isn't an option for some reason), not giving him credit is wrong. This bug would have remained were it not for his effort debugging and developing a fix, and his company investing the development time on it.
- emerongi 3y agoI expected the maintainer to be bit of an asshole. Apparently they were totally respectful. They probably figured `Reported-by` is good enough credit, not putting themselves in the author's shoes (we all do this all the time). The author could have e-mailed the maintainer back and ask them to review their attribution practices and that would've been it. Instead they wrote a scathing article.
- oefrha 3y agoIt’s not debatable at all. It’s simply malicious to put something someone never said in a block quote to make them look bad, especially when the block quote font size is like twice that of everything else. They also cowardly added a “(paraphrasing)” outside to cover their ass. (Edit: in case it’s not clear, I’m not saying they added that after the post was published.) They achieved their goal: look at how many comments assume that malicious “paraphrasing”. They also made sure those of us who aren’t so quick to jump to conclusions after hearing a one-sided story will never interact with them ever.
- phendrenad2 3y agoMalicious or a mis-remembering?
- oefrha 3y agoConveniently misremembering a quote and making that gross misrepresentation a callout is indistinguishable from malice. I cover my ass by avoiding people who commit deniable acts indistinguishable from malice.
- omginternets 3y agoThe OP did say he was paraphrasing.