4 ms·
As an outside observer, it's somewhat amusing to look at these posts with a bit of kremlinology, and try to guess how it all played out. It feels (to me), like
by e1ven 12y ago
As an outside observer, it's somewhat amusing to look at these posts with a bit of kremlinology, and try to guess how it all played out.
It feels (to me), like the CommonMarkdown folk are somewhat frustrated with Gruber.. While he created the initial spec for the format, he hasn't been interested in it for years, and they feel someone needs to own/control it.
By calling the new spec Standard (or common) Markdown, they're implying that they're the rightful team in charge of defining the format, what is/isn't compatible, and how to verify it.
They're treating Gruber very carefully - Giving him Cameos and token references, but not taking his views seriously.
It reminds me a little of Stan Lee in the new Marvel movies - He's a quirky old uncle, not someone who would actually make decisions on the ground.
For example - The CommonMarkdown team say they've been working on this for 2 years, but only sent the current name to Gruber two weeks ago - When he didn't reply, they pushed forward anyway.
His original license had asked that people don't use the name Markdown for derived works, but this seems to have been ignored.
They also felt that he wasn't a modern or relevant user of Markdown - The team seems focused on people who are using Markdown as a commenting format, more than the authoring format Gruber uses it as.
My guess is that releasing publicly was a forcing function - The team didn't have a response from Gruber, and didn't know if or when they'd get one.
The quote "I assure you that we did not choose the name to make you, or anyone else, angry." seems particularly telling - They didn't write that "We thought this would be OK", or "We thought you'd like this".. Just that they didn't do it with a deliberate goal of making any specific person angry.
This seems like a low bar ;)
After they released earlier this week, my guess is that the blowback was somewhat frustrating. They had worked for years on trying to standardize the format, but all anyone was focusing on was the name!
Gruber asked them to shut it down, but (I'm guessing) wasn't interested in an in-depth dialog.
Since they still want to proceed with the project, and (again guessing) still want to be viewed as the default/standard version, they've renamed their project to "Common Markdown".
While they don't have any particular permission for this name either, it has many of the same connotations, but isn't the exact same name. My supposition is that they're betting that since they've now "acquiesced", and changed the name, Gruber will seem unreasonable if he continues to push against them.
Despite having no assurance that the new name is any less objectionable, this lets them concede, and move to PlanB, without risking having to move to a new name altogether.
In any event, as someone without a dog in this particular race, it's somewhat interesting to watch, and try to guess what's really going on ;)
- hoodoof 12y agoThe IT industry is full of crotchety neckbeards with chips on their shoulders who need to be tiptoed around, generally with good reason because when others participate in the work they have created, they feel devalued and lash out. An apology would never serve to satisfy because there is an inherent criticism underneath all this implying that Grubers initial work was less than perfect. That's what he's probably actually angry about, not the mecanics of the process for coming up with a less inconsistent and better defined standard. Failing to reply to Jeff's emails is standard passive-aggressive behavior for people like this. It puts him in a position to shout about how he has been wronged.
- dj-wonk 12y agoI am furious because you misspelled "mecanics". JK. Well said.
- cygx 12y agoThe CommonMarkdown team say they've been working on this for 2 years, but only sent the current name to Gruber two weeks ago - When he didn't reply, they pushed forward anyway. That's a bit misleading. Jeff has been known to rant about Markdown since at least 2009 [1] and decided to do something about it in 2012 [2]. John was contacted at that time. The idea was the following: I'd really prefer not to fork the language; I'd much rather collectively help carry the banner of Markdown forward into the future, with the blessing of John Gruber and in collaboration with other popular sites that use Markdown. That did not happen, so they went ahead on their own. Of course I have no idea what John's private reactions were and if that discussion involved naming issues, but this did not come out of the blue. [1] http://blog.codinghorror.com/responsible-open-source-code-parenting/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/responsible-open-source-code-pa... [2] http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-future-of-markdown/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-future-of-markdown/
- freditup 12y agoThis whole project seems to have lead to a bit of animosity between Jeff and John in the past: https://twitter.com/gruber/status/261650083689426945 https://twitter.com/gruber/status/261650083689426945 https://twitter.com/gruber/status/262287246953164800 https://twitter.com/gruber/status/262287246953164800 It's hard to tell, but Jeff possibly seems to be patronizing John a little in the original 2012 blog post [0] with all the bolded statements about John and the bit about the Yankees. Or he could just as well be trying to have a bit of light-hearted fun with it, I don't think we can judge his intentions in this case. [0]: http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-future-of-markdown/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-future-of-markdown/ (Blog link repeated in this comment for clarity)