Hacker News Reader

Comment by inglor | Hacker News Reader

Similar thread on NodeJS's GitHub. Booming with comments and interesting discussion as usual ;) https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/9295

View on HN

Well, considering the issue was created 6 minutes before you posted this comment, this is facetious and disingenuous.

I didn't notice that - but 42 minutes later I think the comment still stands :)

Check out the other top 5 issues - it's mainly a bunch of people talking to themselves.

Anyhow - I genuinely wanted to link to both - not trying to poke at node.

Just because no one has had the time to read the whole thing, think deeply about his position and state it in the last hour proves nothing.

Ok. Here are some issues from joyent/node that have not gotten any comments in over a month:

https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/9022 https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/8987 https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/8975 https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/8974 https://github.com/joyent/node/issues/8931

Just randomly went to the issues page and looked

I thought you just wanted to link to both proposals and not poke at Node.

Try filling an issue with Google or Apple some time. If you think a month is a long time to wait for a response, you're going to have a bad time.

Given that the Node guys are publicly saying things like 'Io.js, what's that?' I think a little bit of snark is justified.

Wow. Can you provide a URL?

>> “IO.js, what’s that?” asked Joyent CEO Scott Hammond in response to my query about whether projects based on the fork would be able to enter.

http://readwrite.com/2015/02/03/joyent-nodejs-incubator-iojs...

Edit: Agreed with @caipre's reply that the quote isn't as bad as it sounds totally out of context (in hindsight I should have included more of the context in my reply too), and was probably meant tongue-in-cheek. However, I think considering the (perceived? real?) animosity between these two projects, his choice of wording could have been better.

The quote in context isn't nearly as damning as GP made it out to be. It seems to me that Hammond was answering tongue-in-cheek and only meant to emphasize that his focus was on Node.js alone:

  One more thing: Developers using IO instead of Node are,
  well, not invited.

  “IO.js, what’s that?” asked Joyent CEO Scott Hammond in
  response to my query about whether projects based on the
  fork would be able to enter. “This is a Node.js project
  for Node.js innovations.”

I'm not sure I can take the criticism seriously after seeing the source.

Why would people comment there though when the issue even points out that the discussion is on the io.js issue? Seems rather petty.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com