veggieroll

It’s already been months in this case. And, court cases often take many years to resolve.

The issue is more that the court is slow and expensive even in the best case.

Source available is not open source. Don’t try to redefine what open source means. It’s so insulting to volunteers hard work.

> With clear quarterly goals

This requires a quality of product/program management and upper management buy-in that is rare in my experience.

The dynamic I've experienced is upper management giving the same incompetent teams projects over and over, having month after month of meetings with no deliveries and no real progress on the deliverable, and then eventually having to scramble and find someone else who can actually accomplish their goals.

Either that or so many things are broken that there's no possible way to prioritize beyond a few weeks because you can't let attention dip from any one spinning plate for too long or it'll fall.

> overreacting to a small part of [a Pope]'s talk

As is Catholic tradition in the US

Use trailers like has become common for LLM assisted code.

Co-Authored-By: Whatever LLM

License: WTFPL

> add strategic insights

This claim has always been BS in my experience.

I think it is unwise for a maintainer to accept anonymous contributions.

I think the situation your missing is when the employer has a much much more aggressive stance to IP. Even if you are 100% confident that your contribution doesn't violate your employer's IP, they can still sue and ruin your life.

Some employers have an unbelievably unreasonable interpretation of non-compete and IP. They think they own everything their employees do, and even though they're wrong. That doesn't stop them from ruining you and whatever unfortunate open source project they set their sights on with vexatious litigation.

I feel like it'd be kinda a jerk move to contribute anonymously when you know that might create an IP issue for an open source project. Even if the code truly has no IP issue, legal attention from an litigious company would likely be devastating to even a well resourced project.

I have some patches saved up coming your way once I leave my current employer, who doesn't allow external open source contributions. Though that is not for a few years probably.

Love the libraries BTW. Thank you for all of your hard work.

> This library was lacking some key features we needed, like server-side collection synchronization

Yes! This is my #1 issue with the library as well.

Looks like it's available on the coding plan as well.

I would buy one of these if they sold a kit. Although I have the skill-set to assemble an working copy of folk myself without the kit, it's something that I just haven't prioritized doing. And a kit is probably enough for me to get over that hump.

Imagine if the 3D printing movement ideologically refused to sell kits. 3D printing would have remained irrelevant instead of starting a revolution and creating millions of home makers. Same for Arduino and so many other devices.

If the goal of dynamicland & folk is to empower everyone to participate in computing by moving it into the physical world, I'm not sure why lowering the barrier to the necessary hardware is off limits. That's what dynamicland is doing with the UI, but how can anyone interact with the UI if it only exists in Oakland, CA?

Folk is doing the messy work of making dynamicland-style physically interactive computing available on hardware that normal people have access to and in the environment where they currently are.