Hacker News Reader

You're then forced to maintain a fork because of someone else's immaturity. That's not a solution to the problem.

I feel like complaining about a disagreement in direction of an open source project while not wanting to put effort in directing it in the way you like via the normal channels, forking or contribution, to be immature.

I feel like demanding contribution as a response to criticism of open source software is immature. Just because you decided to let everyone see and use your code, doesn't mean someone can't say something negative about it. That is not some sort of privilege reserved for contributors.

>Just because you decided to let everyone see and use your code, doesn't mean someone can't say something negative about it. That is not some sort of privilege reserved for contributors.

Of course not. It's just extremely immature when there are direct ways via work and effort (forking or contributing) to gain social capital in the community to influence change and direction.

So what are the downsides of git changing this?

How is this going to impact your day to day work flow?

"Lemme go run main" is now ambiguous. The main entry point? Or the main branch?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com