On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 09:33:29AM -0500, Bigby James wrote: > I can't speak for Dzen, but the wording of your first message in the thread > gave > me the same impression. We basically have two messages in the discussion > thread > to work with: One from the original author anouncing the project, and one from > you a couple days later telling everyone you've forked the project and patches > should be sent your way instead of vice versa. No feature requests, no bugs > mentioned---just "send me patches."
There was a feature request. It was about implementing */n support. For those who want to see what was fixed can check the git logs of my fork. I don't even remember if at the time Ari had actually already discontinued the original project. All I know is that he came back to the mailing list very shortly after that and posted the implementation of the missing feature. That's what I call dedication. > The fact that a private discussion took > place regarding the future of the project isn't mentioned, and without that > context it can appear as though you're taking over someone else's project > without cause. It is licensed under MIT/X. I don't see the issue here. You can compare the code and decide for yourself if it was without a cause. I can't take over his project, it is his decision to discontinue the original code. I don't see Ari whining over this, so why would you care? If you care about the project and the direction it is taking, then start a technical discussion or even better demonstrate your ideas with patches! I am not here to satisfy all your needs or even provide context that I deem unnecessary. Some of us are already undertaking too much work for the suckless cause. Cheers, sin
