I get that the author is frustrated with false claims about Qt, but calling people working on open source software "hippie coders" is just an insulting misrepresentation harming any rational debate.
> The JAWS people didn't answer emails when we reached out to them (admittedly quite a while ago), so we've been focusing on NVDA support. Patches to improve the situation with JAWS are welcome. Note that we may eventually implement UIA as opposed to IAccessible2, but that work is currently going slow.
So they tried to work with them, but they did not reply. How are they supposed to fix the issue?
If they had been clear up front about their accessibility support, I doubt this would have been an issue in the first place.
That's survival bias: Those who can't are not Linux devs.
Of course, when somebody introduces bugs, that's a problem and should be talked about. But you can do that respectfully without sugarcoating the affair.
That's not how you treat people, especially if you want them in your community. This isn't someone complaining that the 'close' button window control was moved to the wrong side. They've lost their ability to use a large chunk of free software and no one (more or less) cares.
And they're probably frustrated as hell.
The comment you refer to wasn't at all about Qt and the article about accessibility.
That's bullshit. I mean, that's one of the main reasons I never bothered submitting a patch for Linux. Many of us really don't like being told off for what we're doing as a volunteer. I reluctantly can accept a limited amount of abuse for a paid project, but my tolerance for abuse for what I do as a volunteer is zero.