[SuitAndThai]

It's not terribly hard to see how this whole thing came to be offensive to him. Jeff put Gruber in the public spotlight with a question like "give us permission?"

Gruber says 'Yes': whoop de doo

Gruber says 'No': Well, the person at fault looks like Gruber for being prohibitive of others trying to improve his work.

If his opinion was really to be respected, Jeff should've messaged John behind closed doors to see if he could expect his support or not on this committee, like John had any real say in the matter.

[Jonanin]

If Gruber says no, then who else besides him is to blame for needlessly attempting to block Markdown's forward progress, especially when it is seriously in need of attention, and when he has not put in any effort to give it some?

The person at fault would look like Gruber because the person at fault would be Gruber.

[kemayo]

I sympathize with Gruber's apparent position, which I would summarize thusly: "Markdown is /this/, which I released; it is good enough for me; if it's good enough for you as well, use it; if not, feel free to make something for yourself instead".

[gordonguthrie]

I don't think he is saying that. Jeff Attwood is (I think) asking him to say "I approve, this is going to be a Markdown Spec" or "I disapprove" - in which case it will be a Rockdown Spec.

It seems to me that Gruber is adopting a 'Trotsky at Brest-Litovsk' position - "no war, no peace".

[eric_bullington]

This is what I love about HN. Where else would you read a reference to an iconic early 20th-century event[1] in a debate about a parser spec?

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk

[alexchamberlain]

Part of the problem is Gruber is incredibly resistant to change. The software he wrote hasn't changed in 8 years, despite a number of bugs.

[gordonguthrie]

> The software he wrote hasn't changed in 8 years, despite a number of bugs.

That isn't the problem. The problem is that the software hasn't changed despite a number of bugs and the source code asking you to submit bugs.

'Deprecate or maintain' is not an unreasonable request of a public persona in the technology sector.

[troels]

well, maybe that's a feature?

[abecedarius]

I don't understand. I can see how Gruber could dislike being put on the spot, but what makes it offensive? The implication of any flaw in his work?