Hacker News Reader

Comment by dandelany | Hacker News Reader

I'm so tired of this mentality that says basically, if you release something for free on the internet, you are obligated to maintain and support it for the rest of your life. Gruber created this program, for free. You are under no obligation to use it. Don't like it? Here's your money back. It may be true that the code is shit. If you think so, don't use it.

Like other responders, I worry that this mentality causes fewer coders to release their projects, for fear of backlash like this post. Think about it: Your feelings toward Gruber are incredibly negative and hostile, and in fact, you would have better feelings toward him if he had kept Markdown to himself and never released it at all. Does that seem fair to you? If the ill will generated by people like yourself outweighs the good will generated by those who appreciate the code I release, or if I fear that it might, what motivation do I have to release my code?

View on HN

The problem is not that Gruber doesn’t want to maintain Markdown. If that were it, perhaps it would be easier to move on without him.

It’s that he thinks the best option is to do nothing. He claims the title of BDFL without playing the role.

See his first reply to the Markdown mailing list in nearly three years: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/markdown-discuss/2012-Octo...

You have it absolutely correct

He enjoys the credit for being the creator of something used by millions every day, but is entirely unwilling to take the responsibility that comes with that creation being a very public mess.

It works for his usage, but all the ambiguities and undefined behaviors affect a huge number of people, and his only response he's made for eight years has been to retain sole moral authority and refuse to use it.

You gain moral authority by actually doing something. If you use markdown, and wish to propose a better markdown than markdown, go for it, I'm sure lots of people will be pleased, but bear in mind that lots of people will whine about any bugs as well, and expect you to work for them for free and spend significant resources and time fixing edge cases which don't matter to you personally, just because you released the source.

If you're ready for that though, of course go ahead and create a better markdown, or help with this proposed spec, Gruber certainly can't stop you. It doesn't really matter what Gruber says, what trolls on a mailing list say, or what you say on this forum about his responsibilities, whether he is self-appointed dictator for life etc (though I'd dispute that), what counts is putting the work in, which is often surprisingly difficult - far more difficult than criticism.

Of course you can do that. I think people's problem is with Gruber's unwillingness to lend any support to those efforts to create a less buggy implementation.

Right now, the canonical markdown implementation isn't very good. It's hard to change what the canonical implementation is without Gruber's support. It doesn't even require much from him - just his blessing.

He isn't under any obligation to do this. No-one thinks he is. But it would be a good thing for him to do.

Frankly, I don't think what Grubber says matters here, and I see why he wouldn't want to engage all the trolls who are enraged by his inaction. Markdown works for him and he prefers it simple if somewhat vague/buggy, if you need something different, build it.

If someone wants to write a spec, a better parser or a better markdown full stop, there is absolutely nothing to stop them. The problem is, people would rather bitch about why no one else is doing anything and complain about gruber than actually do the hard work necessary. Do the work first, then look to gruber for canonization if you must, though by that point his views on the matter would be irrelevant.

I don't think they're asking for lifetime maintenance and support. I think they're asking that if the author is aware of bugs and exploits, they should at least make the small effort to alert users who are still downloading their code.

If the exploits are as well-known as the grandparent comment asserts, and Gruber is aware of them, there really is no excuse for him to leave the code up without any warning that it contains known exploits. However, if he has no idea and everyone is assuming he knows without someone telling him, that's not exactly fair.

It is far easier to destroy than create. Or to put it in the vernacular of the times: haters gonna hate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com