I don't understand how Guido van Rossum's message was interpreted as "he doesn't want to serve the users". His message said (to me) that he will continue, but he will not make decisions.
> Companies that shut down open-source dev teams are at least usually honest that that's what they're doing at the time that they do it.
This sentence implies that Guido van Rossum did something worse (than these companies) today. Is this what you are saying or I misunderstood?
BTW: I don't know him personally. I don't use Python regularly and I don't have any knowledge or position on Python's developers struggles and disagreements (if there are any).
I'm not commenting on GvR or GvR's behaviour at all. The discussion took a more general turn, with people seriously suggesting that the developers/maintainers of high-profile, publicly-evangelised open-source projects don't have any ethical duty to support or engage politely with their user base even while still in post. Obviously van Rossum is completely entitled to step down, certainly since there will be others to pick up the reins.
I don't understand how Guido van Rossum's message was interpreted as "he doesn't want to serve the users". His message said (to me) that he will continue, but he will not make decisions.
> Companies that shut down open-source dev teams are at least usually honest that that's what they're doing at the time that they do it.
This sentence implies that Guido van Rossum did something worse (than these companies) today. Is this what you are saying or I misunderstood?
BTW: I don't know him personally. I don't use Python regularly and I don't have any knowledge or position on Python's developers struggles and disagreements (if there are any).