> There's no obligation for a hobbyist to fix the stuff they publish online. Correct, but I didn't say there was. The onus being on them to fix it is predicate

> There's no obligation for a hobbyist to fix the stuff they publish online. Correct, but I didn't say there was. The onus being on them to fix it is predicated on anyone having such an obligation at all. If anyone has an obligation, it's always the vendor, not the researcher. But keep in mind this situation involves an IBM-funded open source project under the Red Hat product line. The hobbyist remark is tangential to the story.