"Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch"
1–5 of 5 posts
Re: "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch"
#2I think the current title (i.e. including the word "Demands") is a bit more aggressive than necessary. IMO the Continue post is very sensible and even handed - the relevant sentence is "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch".
Re: "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch"
#3I think the current title (i.e. including the word "Demands") is a bit more aggressive than necessary. IMO the Continue post is very sensible and even handed - the relevant sentence is "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch".
To be honest I also don't feel very good about the current title. From my perspective: the purpose of the statement was not to demand, but to protect the Continue community and show the way to open source done right. The alternative suggested above feels like a fair depiction
Re: "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch"
#4I think the current title (i.e. including the word "Demands") is a bit more aggressive than necessary. IMO the Continue post is very sensible and even handed - the relevant sentence is "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch".
Ok, I've changed the title above to that, since it's a representative sentence from the article itself (which is the standard criterion we apply: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).
(Submitted title was 'Continue (YC S23) Demands PearAI (YC F24) to Start Over")
Re: "Our view is that PearAI should start over from scratch"
#5Start over the repo from scratch, not the code. This seems like paying too much attention to git history but apparently it's already being fixed anyway.