[yongjik]

> No one dared comment on Dave’s behaviour.

> Being in Dave’s bad books meant being denied support. Support for the libraries he wrote. The libraries which powered every clients’ project.

> I was in awe of the respect that Dave commanded.

Now, obviously it's not nice to comment on one's sexual (or fashion) preferences, but sounds like this exact same thing could have happened if Dave was smoking at desk or piling used coffee mugs.

A library that powers the whole company being managed by a single guy who has to answer all others' questions, and selectively denying answers when he feels like, is not a sign of a great programmer. It may not be a sign of a bad programmer (maybe he's just tired of shit), but it's certainly a sign of a poorly run place.

[mcphage]

> this exact same thing could have happened if Dave was smoking at desk or piling used coffee mugs.

It could have happened if Dave was crocheting hand-warmers for homeless orphans, too.

[longstaff2009]

bear in mind that back in 2000 git wouldn't be released for another 5 years. The processes of building software has improved a lot since then