Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 309 posts

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#201

Post by detaro »

ergocoder wrote: post #198
detaro wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that second link is incredibly petty. makes ai look even worse.

Why? Colorette clearly copies that line from nanocolors, no? And he incorporated it into his benchmark to show that colorette is as fast as nanocolor. It sounds like an important optimization. If this wasn't copied, colorette would have been objectively worse than nanocolor.

> Why? Colorette clearly copies that line from nanocolors, no?

And he copied the entire source code earlier and didn't mind hiding who wrote that? But now suddenly a tiny fix (which might be tiny and obvious enough to not even meet any copyright standard, although that's always vague and difficult) is worthy of demanding attribution for? That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy. (Would a mention in the commit message have been really good style anyways? yes.)

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#202

Post by trenchgun »

zkldi wrote: post #153

The JS Open Source Community is filled with people grifting things like this. Quite notably, there's a linter called JS Standard Style, which actually has nothing to do with JS Standards. It's marketed as if it was a standard, the fact that it isn't is tucked away in the readme, and also -- the entire project is just a wrapper around someones .eslintrc file, yet barely any credit is given to the ESLint devs who do al…

Then again, companies like Github and Heroku use it, and even UK Government. Maybe it does produce value for them?

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#203

Post by jsploit »

Bobylonian wrote: post #134
d3nj4l wrote: post #73

I keep thinking about this event and it seems like a fractal of bizarre phenomena. The act of stripping git history and attribution while forking is itself malicious, but then aggressively creating pull requests across major projects to use the new version and rack up your download count (???), then picking petty fights with the creator of the original over attribution (????), and the fanbase (?????) of the forker do…

Arguments of other side explains a lot: https://twitter.com/PostCSS/status/1441734989490446336 https://twitter.com/sitnikcode/status/1441878805337935877

That does not at all explain their overly aggressive approach and (initial) lack of attribution.

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#204

Post by ilaksh »

Something I often repeat on here: popularity and merit are not the same thing. And lacking a strong error correction signal, various disguised forms of cheating and stealing are often rewarded by increased popularity.

Maybe we should add some consequence to these types of things.

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#205

Post by honzzz »

smoldesu wrote: post #174
dudeinjapan wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness to the OP he did optimize the hell out of his colorette lib, it's about 1/10th the size of the widely adopted chalk lib and performs way better. Back in the day I remember he was (rightly) complaining that the chalk author submitted PRs to get chalk used in as many libs as possible, while colorette (or whatever it was called--it has a different name before) was the technically superior solution to the pro…

Then he should have made a PR, or at the very least retained the commit history to recognize the original programmer's work. That's non-negotiable, because commit history can be essential to understanding breakage in mature libraries. The fact that anyone would feel comfortable erasing it leads me to believe there's an ulterior motive.

If I understand correctly, the parent is talking about the original author of the library, not the person who forked it.

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#207

Post by ghoward »

hakre wrote: post #189
ghoward wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I think your comment adds a lot to mine. Licensing of version control history might need to have a legal debate, actually.

You can put it under proprietary reciprocal terms and void the right to copy when history is damaged. Copyright should cover that. You can't do this with lax permissive licenses nor with copyleft as they allow to modify the work, which would mean the right to modify the history.

Those are good points.

Is there any way to have an open source license that protects history?

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#208

Post by throw_m239339 »

leecommamichael wrote: post #157

This is JavaScript package-culture at work. Many packages attempt to be those “as seen on Tv” gadgets which fix weirdly specific issues in a functionally-fixed way. Single-function goods are frequently given cutesy branding names in hopes of making their way into your home/package.json. Now we even have the product-level copycats. Computer code is not an appliance, and no one cares how many people play with your litt…

> This is JavaScript package-culture at work.

Node.js ecosystem makes things worse because of package number inflation due to a piss poor standard library (praise DENO).

But this isn't limited to Javascript. It has everything to do with Github as a social platform. Case point, the same petty drama happens in the Go community with frameworks like "Iris" and the vitriol around it. Github is a repo service yes, but also a social platform, that makes or undo careers and there is potential money involved now.

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#209

Post by iskin »

detaro wrote: post #195
iskin wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a new benchmark results after you backported Nano Colors optimizations and refused to mentioned it https://github.com/jorgebucaran/colorette/issues/78 Just look at performance changes history,

lol, when it comes to one tiny change (which is highly unlikely to actually meet any copyright standard) suddenly they really care about credit? What a dick.

Any ANSI color library is a very simple thing.

Nano Colors mentioned Colorette in docs, COPYRIGHT and keep origin git history.

If Nano Colors was open about credits, why Colorette’s author should not do the same?

Re: A notable JavaScript developer shamelessly copied one of my most downloaded nod

#210

Post by iskin »

exdsq wrote: post #78

Aside from who’s right and who’s wrong, although I do agree with this is an unattributed fork, the idea that JS OSS devs are incentivized to do this to increase their downloads number is absurd. Maybe we need to replace that with a star system including both security vulnerabilities and downloads that is less dopamine-inducing than a moving number.

Why it is a unattributed fork if Colorette is mentioned in docs, COPYRIGHT and origin commits are in history?
Post reply on HN