Which was completely bonkers -- it happened completely in the open, people were just outraged that something like this happens without asking them and not on a schedule they perceive as adequate. Most of them haven't really grasped what was happening and why. Many still don't.

▲ cube00 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> it happened completely in the open

You don't create PRs like this when you're working "completely in the open"

  test ci #30412
  No description provided.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260509235415/https://github.co...

▲ tick_tock_tick 15 hours ago | parent [-]

You don't test CI before you publish stuff?

	▲	cube00 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I give the PR a proper title on creation. I don't see any reason to create a PR with a title of "test ci" and then rename it later to: `Rewrite Bun in Rust #30412`

▲ bmitc 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It wasn't out in the open. It was never announced or discussed ahead of time. It was just done because the company who purchased Bun wanted it done, and they only communicated it was happening once they started.

I don't consider the following comment to be good, honest, and open communication:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48016880#48019226

▲

18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

simonw 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What was dishonest about that comment?

> There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.

... and a few days later he decided that the code wouldn't get thrown out. That doesn't make the comment itself dishonest, he didn't have a crystal ball.

You can absolutely argue that the rewrite was not communicated clearly once they committed to it, but I don't think the comment you linked to there stands as evidence of poor communication at the time it was written.

▲

bmitc 18 hours ago | parent [-]

He knew he wasn't going to throw out the code when he made that comment.

	▲	simonw 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think he didn't know. We are at an impasse.