[teacup50]

My only takeaway from the thread was that you approached the process of patch review begrudgingly, and seemed to assume that everyone should understand/appreciate your node-derived vocabulary and design.

Each iteration of the patch was provided with a whine about whether it was ready for inclusion yet ... when the reality is, that as the patch author, it's your job to make sure there aren't more bugs and the patch is ready for inclusion.

Every time someone found another issue was a red flag to any sane maintainer that your patch wasn't ready for inclusion. Every time you whined about having to iterate, you made it clear that you couldn't be trusted to have written something stable and maintainable.

If you can't deal with working on mature software, stick to startup code.

[btipling]

Nothing you've said is true.

[teacup50]

And nothing you've said is true. Fortunately everyone can compare our subjective realities against the actual thread.