As is your right, I don't understand the negative sentiment around this. This is an MIT license, "... Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any pers

As is your right, I don't understand the negative sentiment around this. This is an MIT license, "... Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software..." A maintainer is all within their rights to decide what code to accept, and it is your right to fork it. If you decide to share your fork with the world with a similar license, the world too can fork your software. That is how it worked for decades now. People don't usually patch their software on their own, as it takes resources to do that. Even for a small change, one usually will have to recompile now and for every update,Also operating within a fork, you will get much limited help from the upstream whether that is further patches, or community support, it tradeoff within authors rights.