Hacker News Reader

Comment by iskin | Hacker News Reader

I completely agree with it.

This is why I used Colorette for a year, promote it and send PRs there. https://twitter.com/sitnikcode/status/1441824191624486924

For for created because Colorette changed API and author didn’t want to change it back. The reasons of fork is clearly desrcibed in project’s docs https://github.com/ai/nanocolors/wiki/Colorette-Changes

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

But when Colorette author backported my performance optimizations he refuses to do the same in return.

View on HN

I don't feel very convinced by the case you are trying to make here.

You did not mention colorette until you were forced to do it. Why not talk to the author before making a fork?

You mention that you disagreed with changes in colorette, but you have no evidence for it. If you discussed it in an issue or PR, that would be easy to find and share.

You took all of colorette. The "backported" performance improvement is a single line of code. That you try to make it seem like exactly the same thing seems childish and bullish to me.

If you are really not acting in bad faith, why not drop your fork now that colorette has changed the API back?

I started to mention Colorette when author asked me.

First mention (it was changed later) was added 6 days ago (threat was created 2 days ago): https://www.npmjs.com/package/nanocolors/v/0.1.2

Webpack team ask Colorette’s author to rollback API 2.x changes here (discussion was cleaned by Colorette’s author, but he said that it is how it see the best API): https://github.com/jorgebucaran/colorette/issues/70

> why not drop your fork now that colorette has changed the API back?

Author continued to act impulsively. He rolled back API in patch release instead of major made breaking changes.

You mentioned colorette, but not that the package was a fork, only that the API was the same. It's very hard to not interpret that as dishonesty.

The author acted impulsively after you copied and rebranded his package and then started pushing it everywhere. And now that's your excuse to keep your fork.

To get back to my original post. We want people to open source their code if it's useful for the community. Your behaviour here is going to scare people away from doing that. One little mistake and then boom someone with a bigger name takes all of your work and fame.

Don't you see that this is not beneficial for the community?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com