Why wouldn't node.js have more contributions? It's the official product and backed by a neutral company (Joyent).
Just like Sun does to Java, Microsoft does to C#, Google does to Golang. It's beneficial.
Joyent is a company of merit that stays out of politics. Integrity trumps popularity, sure it it can ruffle feathers time to time. Why not just enjoy the support and let things coast?
Edit: If anyone has proof otherwise, I'd like to see it. Name one time Joyent ever made a mistake in their open source stewardship.
Is this sarcasm? io.js would not exist if joyent hadn't made significant mistakes, e.g. failing to ship a new release for years, also this political point scoring alienated a lot of people - https://www.joyent.com/blog/the-power-of-a-pronoun
I use node.js daily, I've never had a problem. Nor have I heard any.
Failing to ship a new release, how is that Joyent's fault? It's core developers who are to blame.
I don't understand the point of the link you sent me. How would a gender neutral alienate people? The person they were talking about here wasn't an employee.
But why would Joyent consider rejecting a PR for gender pronouns as a fireable offense? Probably a website defacement / practical joke.
Edit: FYI - I don't follow this. I don't understand why a fork even exists.
Failing to ship a new release, how is that Joyent's fault? It's core developers who are to blame.
You really are out of the loop. The core developers were frustrated at Joyent not pushing their code, so they jumped ship. Joyent was the steward of the codebase, and they were at fault for not incorporating the developers' work.
How would a gender neutral alienate people?
It's the manner in which they handled the issue that was alienating. Screaming about how tolerant they are, all while screwing over one of their primary contributors, demonising him, and saying he'd be fired rather than retrained. They were soapboxing for cheap political points rather than actually being tolerant and understanding. It's why I actually laughed out loud when you described Joyent as a company that doesn't get involved in politics.
The irony is that the developer in question isn't a native speaker of English, and his native tongue is a gendered language, which likely contributed to his blase attitude on the matter. A little understanding, tolerance, and mature discussion and correction (instead of soapboxing) would have gone a long way.
> But why would Joyent consider rejecting a PR for gender pronouns as a fireable offense? Probably a website defacement / practical joke.
That wasn't a rejection because of gender pronouns. That was a rejection because one pronoun was changed from the docs, instead of all of them. This leads to:
- minor change, not suitable for a PR
- inconsistency, either change all of them to match, or leave them alone
> But why would Joyent consider rejecting a PR for gender pronouns as a fireable offense?
Because community pressure, basically. When there's an angry mob outside about to burn your company down, do you just give them who they want or let your company burn and have everyone else fired too?
Just like Sun does to Java, Microsoft does to C#, Google does to Golang. It's beneficial.
Joyent is a company of merit that stays out of politics. Integrity trumps popularity, sure it it can ruffle feathers time to time. Why not just enjoy the support and let things coast?
Edit: If anyone has proof otherwise, I'd like to see it. Name one time Joyent ever made a mistake in their open source stewardship.