[WastingMyTime89]

> it was mhils who first responded like a jerk.

What?!!

Mhils answered happy to setup a support contract if you need timely release while pointing to his email. Nothing in his answer is out of line. I think you need to seriously reset your expectations if you think that answer from someone providing free labour is in any way wrong.

[fogof]

What rubs me the wrong way about the mhils Github response is that it fails to answer the question that the commenter asked: Is there or is there not a target date for the next release (and if so, what is it)? It's fine to charge money to move the date up, but it seems like if you are going to make that offer, you should try to tell the person how much time they would actually be buying.

[WastingMyTime89]

> What rubs me the wrong way about the mhils Github response is that it fails to answer the question that the commenter asked: Is there or is there not a target date for the next release (and if so, what is it)?

Why exactly do you expect him to answer that? It’s not like he is working for the guy. He can do whatever he wants.

Reading this discussion I’m starting to understand why so many open source maintainers end up calling it quit.

[nucleardog]

Yeah, back to what my grandma would say “if you don’t have anything nice to say…”.

Either…

This is something I, as someone spending some time on a passion or hobby project, don’t want to deal with and I’ll just ignore it.

Or

It’s a business transaction and I’ll at least try and explain what services I can provide, not just “lol pay me”. “We don’t have a release schedule. Except in the case of actual critical vulnerabilities making our users vulnerable, releases are tagged when we have enough functional changes to warrant them. If you would like to get in touch to discuss a support contract and us tagging a release just for you and your customers you can contact me at X.”

Refusing to engage on the question or how you can work together and just saying “lol pay me” definitely comes across as “fuck off” to me. And if that was the intent… better to not say anything at all.

[sam_lowry_]

He explained it already: the requested change is purely for regulatory purposes and has no functional value. He would release once enough functional changes accumulate.