Thanks, I need to reread it a second time properly but my first impression is that it sums up my thoughts quite nicely and I have something to link if I find myself as a part of such a meta discussion again. (A discussion about the thing being overblown and how people react, not the discussion about the renaming in a project per se).
I would be interested in hearing the author’s take on the RuboCop example that was discussed on here a week or so ago. That one seems to be an interesting borderline case in some respects.
Personally I think changing the project name is probably a lot of work and one of the compromise routes would be the kind of thing I look into. That being said different people might have different tolerances to the amount of work that is acceptable there (we’ve seen projects be renamed after forks and it worked obviously) and I don’t want to speak for other maintainers
Thanks, I need to reread it a second time properly but my first impression is that it sums up my thoughts quite nicely and I have something to link if I find myself as a part of such a meta discussion again. (A discussion about the thing being overblown and how people react, not the discussion about the renaming in a project per se).
I would be interested in hearing the author’s take on the RuboCop example that was discussed on here a week or so ago. That one seems to be an interesting borderline case in some respects.
Personally I think changing the project name is probably a lot of work and one of the compromise routes would be the kind of thing I look into. That being said different people might have different tolerances to the amount of work that is acceptable there (we’ve seen projects be renamed after forks and it worked obviously) and I don’t want to speak for other maintainers