|
|
|
|
|
by AgentEpsilon
3223 days ago
|
|
I think I understand why they forked Node.js, but what I don't understand is what they hope to accomplish. io.js implemented features that node.js didn't have, but all ayo.js has done is replace the word "node" with "ayo". How does forking the entire project help with protesting this perceived break in the node.js code of conduct? |
|
Given that these people are excluded by the biased application of these rules, this forms a space where they can feel more welcome as those rules will be applied fairly within this space. This should encourage novel solutions and contributions to Ayo.js which of course right now Node.js is free to merge in -- but the people who work in Ayo.js won't have to deal with the perceived inconsistent standards of Node.js or the perceived-as-hostile personalities that can only make it in Node.js but not Ayo.js.
In general forks are not bad things and being 'forkophobic' is a sort of 'open-source smell'; see Bryan Cantrill's talks on forking illumos. I don't think anyone is ready to step up as a BDFL for Ayo.js just yet, but I don't think it's out-of-the-question either.