zlacker

>>bradge+(OP)
This is a great account of "what."

I'm still struggling to understand the "why."

(That's not an implicit criticism of the article, which is extremely appreciated because it's neutral and factual)

I've been away from Ruby for a few years but Shopify always seemed like a huge net positive, sponsoring lots of valuable work on both Ruby and Rails. I never followed Ruby community happenings very closely but I'm not aware of negative feelings towards their community role in the past.

>>JohnBo+PG
It took a fair amount of reading between the lines, but here's what appears to have happened: 1) People and entities with partial control over RubyGems attempted to cancel DHH. 2) In response, elements aligned with DHH kicked the former out of RubyGems. 3) Everyone involved is now attempting to legitimize their motives as "good engineering."

In other words, "When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die."

>>rancor+EJ
> 1) People and entities with partial control over RubyGems attempted to cancel DHH

Ok there it is. That would explain why they’re being so cagey. I thought there had to more to this.

>>bn-l+HO1
The term "canceled" seriously needs to be retired.

If I understand correctly, Sidekiq's owner pulled his funding from Ruby Central because of his concerns with DHH. That's... one person.

Of course, many dislike DHH's views. Others like him more for his views. He is outspoken about controversial topics. Obviously this garners him fans, and detractors. Using terms like "canceled" is deeply useless at best.

>>JohnBo+1g2
It’s a useful term to describe mob behaviour.