[martinvonz]

Thanks for working on this project!

It was mentioned on the JJ Discord server that there doesn't seem to be any information available about who you are. Especially since the project seems to be closed-source, perhaps you could share some information about who you are in order to build trust.

I hope you understand. I think users may hesitate to download and install the application without knowing anything about its publisher.

[_pvzn]

Totally understandable! I'm a solo dev out of LA who's mostly consulted on various apps and sites over the years, and out of my own personal need I began working on the project earlier this year.

The project is indeed closed-source. Personally I've had experiences where I found the project moved forward towards the roadmap much faster - specifically when considering smaller-scale projects that are UI heavy and therefore take in many UI changes in parallel - when I instead implemented feature requests and focused most of my energy on listening to user feedback rather than reviewing code. UI polish can be quite tricky when it comes from many sources :)

That said, nothing is set in stone! If at some point there are enough feature requests to where I am the bottleneck, this is something I would revisit.

I'd be happy to hop on the Discord as well!

[MrJohz]

You can make the code open source without accepting pull requests or contributions from other people. You might still get pull requests or patches, but you can set expectations up front and then ignore/auto-close any contributions you get.

This is how SQLite is developed, for example.

[socalgal2]

More power to you! I bought Sublime Merge. I'd consider buying yours once it has a little more history. I've been using gg and really miss a side-by-side diff view. Maybe that makes less sense with jj though

[juped]

That's their choice, don't try to pressure them to self-dox. What is wrong with you / the "JJ Discord server"? Please identify yourself and everyone there so I can be sure to up my paranoia around each of you.

[martinvonz]

I think you misunderstood. I didn't ask for their name. Luckily the author didn't seem to misunderstand.

As for information about me, you can search the internet for my username. Let me know if you don't find anything and I can try to help. I'm not going to share information about others on the Discord server.

[juped]

I think you're a person behaving in a very socially harmful way, purportedly representing a group of such people. I think this based on the actual words you wrote. You're not behaving harmfully because you don't want to use software without the author's dox, you can have any preferences you like, but because you think your desire not to use it without the author's dox gives you any standing to impose demands on another person.

"I didn't ask for their name" is a ridiculous reply. You asked for some unspecified degree of personal information. Luckily the author didn't bow to your pressure but just said "I'm a software developer", which we already knew because of the developed software.

Why don't I have standing to demand people's dox as some random idiot Internet commenter? Answer this question and then turn your answer around on yourself. Then, maybe, apologize? Or don't, if you have some other way to psychologically ensure you won't go around demanding people's information in the future.

[usefulcat]

Maybe there's some other subtext here that I'm completely unaware of, but based on what I've read here, I gotta say that this is an impressive level of hostility, even by internet standards.

[kpcyrd]

The post also mentions this is only a problem because of closed source, I think "I want to keep my government identity private, but here's the source code" would be a fair compromise.

If one wants to be extra "there's nothing up my sleeve" they could also publish instructions for how to do reproducible builds for the compiled artifacts (which does require publishing the source code however).

[wiseowise]

Nobody is pressuring anyone. GP is free to ask and OP is free to decline.