Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
Posted Mar 15, 2024 18:01 UTC (Fri) by mb (subscriber, #50428)In reply to: Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++ by pizza
Parent article: Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
That was not necessary, because he left the project before that was necessary.
>The author owes everyone else precisely *nothing*.
Yes. It's his right to step down.
That's what he did.
Where's the problem?
Posted Mar 15, 2024 20:42 UTC (Fri)
by pizza (subscriber, #46)
[Link]
"stepping down" is a deliberate act of removing yourself from some position (or otherwise giving up some sort) of power.
Saying he(?) "has the right to step down" already presupposes something that was never a given; namely that he owed anyone anything to begin with.
> Where's the problem?
The fact that he was expected (if not outright demanded) to take _any_ sort of action or effort for someone else's benefit to begin with.
Posted Mar 15, 2024 23:45 UTC (Fri)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (3 responses)
But it should have been his FREE CHOICE to step down.
> Where's the problem?
He didn't WANT to step down.
Cheers,
Posted Mar 16, 2024 0:03 UTC (Sat)
by mb (subscriber, #50428)
[Link] (2 responses)
No. It absolutely should not.
If this is a project that many people depend on, then the author should not have the free choice to continue the project at his own choice and force, if the majority disagrees.
It is his free choice to fork the project.
Just the the "stupid majority" go. What's the problem?
Posted Mar 16, 2024 22:32 UTC (Sat)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (1 responses)
If this is a project that many people depend on, then they were bloody idiots to depend on a project by someone who did not share the same values they did.
If you fnd a project that does 90% of what you want, and that extra 10% is unacceptable to the project owner then it on YOU to FORK it, not seize it by force.
At the end of the day, the very Register article you pointed us at said it was mob rule. The behaviour shown here was completely unacceptable, made even worse by the fact there was a perfectly acceptable, friendly, alternative.
Cheers,
Posted Mar 17, 2024 2:21 UTC (Sun)
by paulj (subscriber, #341)
[Link]
If someone wrote some code, and lets you use it for free, and you think it should be written differently, or some things could be done different or added: Suggest it, very nicely, as a "might be nice...". And if they disagree, well, say "Thanks for the code!". Your choices after that (if you're a not self-absorbed, toxic, ingrate) are to see if you can /pay/ the author, or fork and do it yourself (or pay someone else).
Don't be the self-absorbed, toxic, ingrate, who thinks that there are some holy coding rules, passed down from the great bearded hacker in the sky, the transgression of which justifies against a (non-profit, coding for fun) transgressor a campaign of "ostracism" - which the recipient is very likely to perceive as abusive.
Especially when these rules are not even in the damn compiler. Hell, the "transgressor" is explicitly /conforming/ to the rules of the language, as checked by the compiler.
Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
> That's what he did.
The whole point of this thread is that apparently it was NOT his free choice. He was *driven* out.
Wol
Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
There is no loss for the maintainer to continue to maintain the project in private or as a separate minor project.
if the maintainer does not care about the users, it should be no problem to maintain a fork.
Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++
Wol
Herb Sutter on increasing safety in C++