Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Yes, I agree. And some of the “admins” even announced publicly many days ago they were launching a competitor tool and were funding raising for it. I’d not trust the system to such “admin”."

https://bsky.app/profile/rmfranca.bsky.social/post/3lz7alpob...

See https://spinel.coop/

"Spinel develops rv, the next-generation Ruby version manager"



This doesn't explain how rv is threatening rubygems in any way.


They were using the name "rubygems" to fund-raise for not-"rubygems."


But how is this a conflict? Both are not-for-profit projects with the same goal? How can one even use the term 'competition' in this context? What if the Ruby community embraces a new and better package manager? This is, again, a net win for the Ruby community, and both projects strive for that?


It doesn't really matter if it's a non-profit. How do you think your company would react if you started raising money using their name?


Is Rubygems a company? My mind cannot comprehend why are people conflating not-for-profit open-source projects with for-profit companies...

If Rubygems was a company, they'd have a trademark, they'd have patents, they'd have lawyers to protect the money they were making from their brand and product. But we are speaking about not-for-profit open-source projects, not for for-profit corporations!


Ruby Central is a company that manages rubygems.org and rubygems. The maintainers who were locked out were being paid by Ruby Central while fundraising for their startup creating a competitor.

Doesn't it seem like a bit of a security risk to you?


No. (Disclaimer I got paid to work on rubygems and have been doing this for 18 years)


How about now?


Why in the world would my opinion have changed?


[flagged]


Oh, don't worry, I get what you and Rafael are trying to insinuate. I just want you to spell it out so that hopefully you see how stupid it sounds.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: