OT: 'conduct unbecoming of a hacker'

[Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d]

On 02/09/2016 09:11 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
> http://sealedabstract.com/rants/conduct-unbecoming-of-a-hacker/
> (His particular suggestion about accept patches by default is not why I
> post this).


Just read the rest of the article. That's a REALLY good article. 
Especially these bits:

===============================

"Consider the following outcomes, which happen with some regularity:
* [...]
* Objections that the problem should be solved another way, but that are 
accompanied without any volunteers to do it that way. A patch in the 
hand is better than two in the bush. If somebody does end up doing it 
the “right” way someday, git revert is only 10 keystrokes. The fact that 
someday a better patch might appear is not an argument against merging 
an adequate patch right now.

* Bare assertions that there is no need for the feature, when the fact 
that somebody wrote a patch should be primae facie evidence that the 
feature was needed"

-------------------

"Really, what I’m asking is this: Which is more convincing? Concrete 
computer code authored by someone with first-hand knowledge of the 
defect? Or the bare assertion that something is wrong with it? I mean, 
either one might be correct. But the first is better supported."

==============================

Really like: "A patch in the hand is better than two in the bush."