Standard HN weirdo behavior getting angry at imaginary opponents and ranting about personal agency
You’re in a discussion section. Things will be discussed. Unless YOU are a top contributor to gitea, you’re doing exactly what you’re complaining everyone else here is doing: wasting time opining on the direction of a software you didn’t write
It might be helpful if you share information on where your perspective is coming from. Your comments here confuse me, as someone peering in from the outside.
(disclaimer: I co-organize within an IRL 5000 member community revolving around civics, software and open culture. and through that, I chum around with folks involved in organizational transformation in general.)
EDIT: or not. Just maybe ppl will care more to hear or understand the opinions you're broadcasting if you offer some context?
I do care if many people who are "doing" for an OS project are not informed with or have a choice in regards to the "brand" of the project. Sure, we can all fork this project (which started out as a fork) but it would be nice of people played nice and so we can all stay with the current fork we love.
Having said all this, I need to read up on this because this might be a nothing burger. My comments are, in general, my expectations of how OS projects should work.
The value of trademarks is far more than you are making out. That value doesn't come from "how clever the name is", but from name recognition and community reputation.
The community can fork the project and rename it. However, this comes as costs of losing name recognition/reputation and creating additional drama in the community. If the issue can be resolved amicably, it is better to avoid the need for this.
Standard HN weirdo behavior getting angry at imaginary opponents and ranting about personal agency
You’re in a discussion section. Things will be discussed. Unless YOU are a top contributor to gitea, you’re doing exactly what you’re complaining everyone else here is doing: wasting time opining on the direction of a software you didn’t write
> Unless YOU are a top contributor to gitea
And the top contributors seem to be exerting that choice aren't they? Now what?
It might be helpful if you share information on where your perspective is coming from. Your comments here confuse me, as someone peering in from the outside.
(disclaimer: I co-organize within an IRL 5000 member community revolving around civics, software and open culture. and through that, I chum around with folks involved in organizational transformation in general.)
EDIT: or not. Just maybe ppl will care more to hear or understand the opinions you're broadcasting if you offer some context?
> qualify yourself, you've contradicted me!
No. It's friday. Go write some code. The essence of this thread is people feeling they're owed what they aren't.
3 replies →
I use gitea and I do some proselytizing for it.
I do care if many people who are "doing" for an OS project are not informed with or have a choice in regards to the "brand" of the project. Sure, we can all fork this project (which started out as a fork) but it would be nice of people played nice and so we can all stay with the current fork we love.
Having said all this, I need to read up on this because this might be a nothing burger. My comments are, in general, my expectations of how OS projects should work.
The value of trademarks is far more than you are making out. That value doesn't come from "how clever the name is", but from name recognition and community reputation.
The community can fork the project and rename it. However, this comes as costs of losing name recognition/reputation and creating additional drama in the community. If the issue can be resolved amicably, it is better to avoid the need for this.