11–20 of 186 posts
Having reviewed the relevant tweets/GitHub issues/blog posts, I feel most of the noise is generated by people who make it their mission to find things about which to be outraged. The NodeJS brand has the momentum necessary to build great things. If they squander it by cry-wolf-forking every time there is an internal disagreement, another JS engine (e.g. Chakra) will take the helm.
Shame how such a cool project as node.js can drown in political fingerpointing. The only measurement that counts (in my opinion) is cold hard code contributions.
Are you going to accept cold hard code contributions from someone who regularly writes excellent code and has the technical sense of the community about 80% of the time, and is at odds with the technical sense of the community 20% of the time, and regularly tells everyone involved in the 20% case that they're idiots and the project will fail if they don't merge the remaining 20% of their code (which is technically excellent too, just not implementing the design people want)?
Are you going to accept cold hard code contributions from someone who generally writes good code that works on the first try but refuses to listen to code reviews?
Are you going to accept cold hard code contributions under the wrong license? (Licenses are politics, not code!)
I don't particularly understand the claims against this man, but as this organization and its discussions happen (almost) entirely online [is this correct?], surely it must be incredibly obvious whether or not allegations brought against him are true or not?
> I do not recall being asked to remove the names of the companies involved, I have only now seen that they have been edited out of my post. I cannot find any evidence that such a request was even made. This would have been a trivial matter on my part and I would have done it without argument if I had have seen such a request.
Having reviewed the relevant tweets/GitHub issues/blog posts, I feel most of the noise is generated by people who make it their mission to find things about which to be outraged. The NodeJS brand has the momentum necessary to build great things. If they squander it by cry-wolf-forking every time there is an internal disagreement, another JS engine (e.g. Chakra) will take the helm.
Shame how such a cool project as node.js can drown in political fingerpointing. The only measurement that counts (in my opinion) is cold hard code contributions.
But more than once, he jumped into projects and features that he knew other people on the team were already working on, implemented them himself in a rush without coordinating with the other developers, and pushed his code instead.
Sometimes he would take shortcuts to get it done faster while his teammates were working on a more fully developed version of the feature. And since he was first, that was the code that would be used. The other developers were left with nothing to show for their efforts, less of a feeling that they were valued members of the team, and a significant loss of reputation in the eyes of management.
Cold hard code is important, of course. But it's not the only thing.
A bit of a thought experiment for myself: suppose that Rod were as terrible as the worst possible claims made against him. (I am confident he's not.) Suppose he were actively, consciously hoping to deceive and harm the Node community. (I am also confident he's not.) What sort of statement would he write? How much would it look like this one?
Node community is going to argue its way into obscurity.
While the snark of this comment may push it into obscurity by those who hate snarky comments, I totally agree. I was surprised we could even still have Node.js after the huge Node.js vs io.js debacle. I think all of these arguments are about important issues, but they also can give a very negative impression to outsiders (not to mention how insiders aware of all the facts may feel). That said, I am at least happy to…
This is not the same and highlights why a code of conduct focusing on moral issues is not always the best path for a project/language.
I think the main takeaway here is that a Code of Conduct, while valuable, has to be treated carefully. A lot of these projects agreed to a Code of Conduct just to appease a certain faction of their devs, and are now seeing that it can be used against them.