
LLVM tried some nasty tactics to grow, read the whole thread - sconxu
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/dotgnu-libjit/2004-05/msg00012.html
======
dang
Using a title to editorialize like this breaks the site guidelines.

If you want to say what's important about an article, please do so in the
comment thread, on a level playing field with everyone else. On Hacker News,
submitting a story does not confer the right to frame it for everyone else.

~~~
renesd
I added it again with the original title of the email thread.

------
int_19h
I don't see any "nasty tactics" in the linked thread.

LLVM guy came and asked the misleading description of his project to be
corrected, which he got. Along the line (of explaining why it's misleading),
he also pointed out that the projects fundamentally have a lot in common, and
that their users would benefit from an eventual convergence - which seems
obviously true on the surface.

Now, libjit folk seem to have some valid technical reasons to not go down that
route, including implementation language (C vs C++) and conceptual minimalism
of libjit. Which they have clearly expressed.

All in all, a polite conversation around a genuinely reasonable question.
Where's the nastiness?

------
erydo
What "nasty tactic" are you referring to? I see:

    
    
      Actually I was going to suggest that we work together and merge the best features of both into a common source-base that could be used by both groups going forward: eventually unifying the developer pool and mind share.  This might be difficult, but I think the end result would be useful.
    

Reaching out to another project with similar goals to clarify and understand
the differences, and offer collaboration doesn't seem nasty. Am I missing
something?

------
AgentIcarus
I'm not seeing a smoking gun here and the thread looks very reasonable. I see
nothing related to "growth" so maybe link to something that actually backs up
your assertion?

------
jitl
This title is Fake News.

