doesn't mean they have to fix it over the weekend - if it is that urgent to someone who has spotted the issue then they can work over the weekend and submit a patch for the issue.
Programming languages enthusiast. Author of Learn Type Driven Development: https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/learn-type-driven-development
And it isn't a mind game. Maybe it doesn't apply to you, but a lot of people from all professions take pride in their work, the log4j devs among them it seems and rightly so.
See, that's exactly what I mean by 'mind game', this 'maybe it doesn't apply to you, but other people take pride in their work'. This is the kind of snide commentary, the mentality that 'if you don't agree with me then you must not be good at your job'. This is exactly gatekeeping.
But we do get to do that [criticize]. ... Pointing out a mistake isn't criticism in the negative sense of the word.
It's also supremely unhelpful. Nothing constructive about it. You think this needs to be pointed out to the log4j maintainers? You think they aren't intensely aware of the problem? Which part of 'Yet nothing is stopping people to bash us, for work we aren't paid for, for a feature we all dislike yet needed to keep due to backward compatibility concerns.', makes it seem like they need to be told that this feature was a mistake?
And judging people on their actions isn't gatekeeping. It's how one is supposed to judge other people.
But that's exactly it. It's not your place to judge unpaid volunteer OSS maintainers. If you actually want to help, then step up with donations or contributions. The peanut gallery can sit back down!
telling developers when and where they can have an opinion on the work of their peers sounds to me like the bad kind of gatekeeping.
That's the most made-up definition of 'gatekeeping' I've ever heard of, smh.
See, that's exactly what I mean by 'mind game', this 'maybe it doesn't apply to you, but other people take pride in their work'. This is the kind of snide commentary, the mentality that 'if you don't agree with me then you must not be good at your job'.
If I want to say someone isn't good at their job, then I'd say it directly. You are reading maliciousness in my comments where it doesn't exist. I've been treating your comments with good faith, but if you aren't going to do the same to mine, then perhaps this conversation has run its course.
It's also supremely unhelpful. Nothing constructive about it. You think this needs to be pointed out to the log4j maintainers?
Unless you're on the log4j dev team, then I've never even spoken to them, I haven't pointed anything out to them, and I definitely haven't been bashing them.
Talking about mistakes that devs have made is extremely useful and helpful to future devs to avoid making the same mistakes.
But that's exactly it. It's not your place to judge unpaid volunteer OSS maintainers.
It's not your place to tell me or anyone else who we can or can't judge.
Thanks for the interesting discussion, but since you seem to have taken this personally and are now turning to accusations and assumptions of bad faith, I think it best that we just agree to disagree.
Programming languages enthusiast. Author of Learn Type Driven Development: https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/learn-type-driven-development
Well, you came in highly praising Rich Hickey's post about open source and then proceeded to take away the exact opposite of what he said. Best of luck to you too.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
doesn't mean they have to fix it over the weekend - if it is that urgent to someone who has spotted the issue then they can work over the weekend and submit a patch for the issue.
See, that's exactly what I mean by 'mind game', this 'maybe it doesn't apply to you, but other people take pride in their work'. This is the kind of snide commentary, the mentality that 'if you don't agree with me then you must not be good at your job'. This is exactly gatekeeping.
It's also supremely unhelpful. Nothing constructive about it. You think this needs to be pointed out to the log4j maintainers? You think they aren't intensely aware of the problem? Which part of 'Yet nothing is stopping people to bash us, for work we aren't paid for, for a feature we all dislike yet needed to keep due to backward compatibility concerns.', makes it seem like they need to be told that this feature was a mistake?
But that's exactly it. It's not your place to judge unpaid volunteer OSS maintainers. If you actually want to help, then step up with donations or contributions. The peanut gallery can sit back down!
That's the most made-up definition of 'gatekeeping' I've ever heard of, smh.
If I want to say someone isn't good at their job, then I'd say it directly. You are reading maliciousness in my comments where it doesn't exist. I've been treating your comments with good faith, but if you aren't going to do the same to mine, then perhaps this conversation has run its course.
Unless you're on the log4j dev team, then I've never even spoken to them, I haven't pointed anything out to them, and I definitely haven't been bashing them.
Talking about mistakes that devs have made is extremely useful and helpful to future devs to avoid making the same mistakes.
It's not your place to tell me or anyone else who we can or can't judge.
Thanks for the interesting discussion, but since you seem to have taken this personally and are now turning to accusations and assumptions of bad faith, I think it best that we just agree to disagree.
Best of luck and have a nice day.
Well, you came in highly praising Rich Hickey's post about open source and then proceeded to take away the exact opposite of what he said. Best of luck to you too.