> I can't agree. Like most rants, I found it to be very needlessly emotional, lacking in the technical department, and motivating towards the wrong goal
It's titled as a rant, in a file called RANTS.md, and unless you've gone out of the way to read it, the rest of the immediately available documentation looks to be perfectly professional and courteous. I'm not sure what you are expecting?
I dislike when this sort of stuff is front-and-center on a project but it seems perfectly reasonable to accept that a developer might have opinions and feelings that caused them to "scratch an itch". People who aren't annoyed with existing systems don't in general try to replace or work around them, and there's certainly a load of projects I've found with disagreeable approaches to contributions or governance that I would rather not put my own time into. I imagine they feel the same, and appreciate that they documented that frustration.
I'm asking for people to stop posting these rants. There's nothing wrong with scratching an itch, but the rants are just inflammatory and cause drama. I have never personally found them to be an adequate documentation of governance issues, and it almost always seems to devolve into a "he said she said" type of situation. Every time I've dug into an issue (this one included) the rant is way off-base with what is actually happening, and when I push back on it the developer just starts getting hostile at me and further fanning the flames. So it's not really useful to try and dismiss this by saying "oh it's just one piece of documentation you don't have to read it," my point is that people are still using these bad attitudes to inform themselves when that's a destructive thing to do. I mean, come on, someone just posted this in an HN comment. If you want to vent to your friends about how you think someone is a jerk then just do that, but it hurts me when that gets dumped in front of me as someone who's just try to comment on these issues and get my terminal fixed.
Open source in general has a problem with this, if it's left unchecked it leads to toxic behavior very quickly. That's my experience anyway. Traditional diplomacy doesn't help because some people seem to see open source as a "I can do whatever I want" type of thing, which it is. It's fine to do whatever you want in your free time but once you combine that with an attitude of "I will never change my mind or stop ranting" then is when it gets destructive and harmful towards someone who is trying to build a community and convince other projects to collaborate and adopt a shared standard. So if that's the goal then the ranting and bad attitudes need to stop. (Full disclosure: I'm saying this as someone who used to rant quite a lot, and damaged many relationships over it. It felt good for me but it made everyone around me become distrustful of each other)
If you want to downvote me again then that's fine, but if you have something to say then please reply. A downvote or an upvote can't mend a broken relationship like a strong conversation can.
It's titled as a rant, in a file called RANTS.md, and unless you've gone out of the way to read it, the rest of the immediately available documentation looks to be perfectly professional and courteous. I'm not sure what you are expecting?
I dislike when this sort of stuff is front-and-center on a project but it seems perfectly reasonable to accept that a developer might have opinions and feelings that caused them to "scratch an itch". People who aren't annoyed with existing systems don't in general try to replace or work around them, and there's certainly a load of projects I've found with disagreeable approaches to contributions or governance that I would rather not put my own time into. I imagine they feel the same, and appreciate that they documented that frustration.