Conversation

Replying to and
this seems like is / ought there is nothing, legally or practically, stopping a maintainer from doing this I don't think that's the spirit of open source; the project can be easily forked and re-hosted but users weren't doing that because they trusted the ecosystem
1
2
Replying to and
Open source is making the source code available for anyone to use for any purpose even if that purpose is mass murdering people. The spirit of open source is devaluing labour so that corporations can build software more cheaply. This person didn't realize that getting into it.
1
It's their own fault they released they software under an open source license but I think most open source maintainers have felt this way at one point or another. I don't really think they did anything particularly malicious or terrible. It wouldn't pass any basic smoke test.
2
Replying to and
If you blindly update to new versions and deploy without testing, they did you a service by showing you that what you're doing is completely broken even if you do trust your dependencies. They didn't hide a backdoor or trap that triggers later. It just spams nonsense on loading.
1
1
Replying to and
you could say this to justify basically anything, is breaking apps really ok because they should have known better? yes, they were trying to make a point and not steal data or whatever but it's still damaging even if all it does is break a log ingestor
1