> See, this is what I don't understand about this type of developer. That's ok. It's ok to be different. I'm probably more like you for my own projects, but th

> See, this is what I don't understand about this type of developer. That's ok. It's ok to be different. I'm probably more like you for my own projects, but that doesn't invalidate this guy's stance. > When you publish an OSS project, it is an implicit invitation for collaboration, and for being part of a community around shared interests where everyone benefits. It is not. > That is the entire point of F/LOSS. If it were, don't you think that part would be written into at least one popular FLOSS license? > People who think like this are doing themselves and their software a disservice. Software is better when it is worked on as a community effort, much like a garden. An individual might have good ideas, and be able to execute them well, but they're not omniscient nor omnipotent. Who are you to decide for another person? Can I decide such things about your actual garden? > If Linus Torvalds had published Linux as his "personal garden", it would have never been even remotely as good and popular as it is today. It would have probably been another niche project in the footnotes of history. I'm glad he didn't. But if he had, do you really think that shaming or pressuring him into doing it differently would have in any way made him feel like continuing? Linux would have died.