Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#1

Post by nathanscott » Wed, Jun 06, 2012, 5:35 AM UTC

Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it
github.com

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#2

Post by knieveltech » Wed, Jun 06, 2012, 6:13 AM UTC

So is this accepted practice in Ruby circles? It seems pretty bogus to me.

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#3

Post by bobowzki » Wed, Jun 06, 2012, 6:14 AM UTC

Is this good or bad in ruby circles?

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#4

Post by AncientPC » Wed, Jun 06, 2012, 7:04 AM UTC

That's what Linux package maintainers do, no one seems to have a problem with it.

Public code is public. As long as the licenses are followed and/or credit is given who cares?

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#5

Post by cleverjake » Wed, Jun 06, 2012, 1:24 PM UTC

knieveltech wrote: post #2

So is this accepted practice in Ruby circles? It seems pretty bogus to me.

why?

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#6

Post by knieveltech » Wed, Jun 06, 2012, 2:48 PM UTC

cleverjake wrote: post #5

knieveltech wrote: post #2

So is this accepted practice in Ruby circles? It seems pretty bogus to me.

why?

It seems pretty crap to just unilaterally make decisions regarding someone else's code.

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#7

Post by cleverjake » Fri, Jun 08, 2012, 2:28 PM UTC

knieveltech wrote: post #6

cleverjake wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why?

It seems pretty crap to just unilaterally make decisions regarding someone else's code.

I'd agree with that statement - however I really don't feel that that happened here. I guy did they a favor, and wanted to give them ownership over it. Im sure he would have removed it if requested.

Re: Saw your gem on Github, so I thought I'd release it

#8

Post by knieveltech » Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 6:24 PM UTC

cleverjake wrote: post #7

knieveltech wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems pretty crap to just unilaterally make decisions regarding someone else's code.

I'd agree with that statement - however I really don't feel that that happened here. I guy did they a favor, and wanted to give them ownership over it. Im sure he would have removed it if requested.

Fair enough. Clearly I misunderstood what I was looking at.