[traviswebb]

Your assessment is perfectly logical based on the information you have available, and also mostly wrong.

First, I'm not 22, and our COO ran the largest jQuery cobsulting firm (appendTo) for 5 years. Second, McNeil did not hire us, we purchased the company; McNeil has no ownership in the "new" Balderdash. Your educated guesses about hitting metrics and so forth don't apply to anything here.

Mike McNeil needs control of Sails.js because he promised it to his VC investors behind treeline. We did not know this when we entered into the acquisition of Balderdash, and that's not what we signed up for. Since we were lied to for nearly a year, we are pivoting the company and our open-source efforts toward other things. Trails is one of those things.

[dbg31415]

Not sure how Mike can kick you out if he doesn't own the company. Sounds like either he does own the company, or he's not the one who kicked you out... Anyway I'm inclined to believe the company website. If you bought the company you've got access to the site? DNS? Or a contract? Doesn't seem like that's the case given your actions trying to get people to move away from Sails.

So yeah, you saying the project is dead when you know others are still working on it, and trying to tell other people to switch with you -- seems at best shady. Getting a project rolling is hard enough without an active saboteur. Not a great way to get your own business going. Seems to me -- outsider perspective -- you should just move on and focus on your own thing. Clean breaks, right?

[traviswebb]

He owned some of the assets, still, including the github org. Even though we negotiated an agreement, and were operating the company under the assumptions of that agreement, McNeil refused to sign it at the last minute and spent the past two months clawing everything back that he could. We still own the Balderdash LinkedIn page and npm account, for example.

He refuses to speak with me directly, so there's no resolution to this yet. Nor do we really understand why he decided on this course of action at all. I hope to bring things back to some equilibrium, but one permanent change is that we are no longer supporting Sails, and are directing all our efforts toward developing Trails.

The maintained-ness of Sails is really a separate issue from the ceo-schism drama. There are plenty of other literature which discuss the technical deficits of Sails, and the incredible amount of work it needs merely to be viable as an enterprise framework. That it relies on EOL'd dependencies, and has no plans to upgrade them, is an example.

[uniacid]

Having witnessed feuds between Founder and CEO before they're never a pretty sight, so thats why the future of Sails.js has been very disconcerting.

Hopefully relationships can be amended amicably and if Sails.js is truly dead in the water then hopefully Trails.js will pick up where it left off and on better footing I hope, but it will take some time and also some proper PR might of been helpful to the many Sails.js users as well as it didn't need to reach this point, also on that PR note should we expect that they can easily port over their Sails.js projects over to Trails.js?

I was hoping to re-visit Sails.js for a project but considering all that's been happening I'm not sure I should just go with something else like Python+Flask and let Trails.js mature a bit more.

[mikermcneil]

I'm sorry that this debacle has negatively impacted your opinion of the framework. Other open-source maintainers had warned me in the past that this kind of thing is par for the course as any project grows, but it doesn't make it any easier to deal with when it happens to you. In the mean time, it has certainly made my family's holidays unpleasant, and disrupted the lives of the rest of our team.

I posted a few important clarifications here in the original issue: https://github.com/balderdashy/sails/issues/3429#issuecommen...