This is one of those occasions where evidence and material facts are irrelevant, what actually matters is how people feel about using Google products. Is the average developer going to feel confident about recommending a Google service to their manager?
Marketing is all about confidence, regardless of the facts the public perception is that google shuts down services with wild abandon, that is a perception google needs to work to fix and your response merely confirms it
Awesome work! Are there plans to incorporate Flow definitions as an alternative to the __assumeDataProperty helpers?
Edit: Looks like this is targeting compiler output, so Flow types would typically be gone by that stage. Integration with Flow could come via a babel plugin that emits `__assumeDataProperty()` when it encounters a convertible Flow type.
Dunno, Merriam-Webster list it as both,[1] though from your comment I get that it is most commonly understood as the store. Thanks for the tip though, I was only aware of the food meaning.
EFL is open source software, BSD licenced. The original author of the comment is not a customer. It's some uninformed person trashing the good work someone has made available to them for free. This attitude makes me want to stop writing open source, it's disgusting to see.
If even one third of what the original author was complaining is true (and judging by the response, it's way more than that), I don't see how EFL can be called "good work" in good conscience. Bad code and bad design don't get a free pass on account of being open source.
I can't comment on the specific details, I've never used EFL, but in general, when encountering problems with open source software you can do one of two things:
1. Write a long and angry rant about how terrible the software is on a public forum.
2. File issues, participate in the community, ask questions on the mailing list, submit pull requests to improve the docs, try and understand the design decisions behind the software you're using - it's possible that the author knows more about the problem than you, and there are perfectly good reasons for why things are as they are.
One of these things is more productive than the other.
In this case, the rant is not talking about minor bugs that can be fixed with a few (or even a few hundred) lines of code. It's talking about major design defects.
I do have to note, though, that the options are actually:
1. Use something else that's better.
2. <same as what you wrote above>
Based on everything I've read about EFL, including responses from its devs, #1 is by far the most productive choice you can make in these circumstances.
The rant is not really an option as such. It's just a way for someone to vent their frustration, which people occasionally need when dealing with problems like that in order to make themselves feel sane again. You can rant first, but you still have a choice of #1 or #2.
I also have to note that, for the author of the rant, neither was an option, because they weren't working on a project where they had a choice of framework - they were working on Tizen, and had to use EFL, that choice being made for them. I also doubt that their manager would allow them to use some of their work hours to go fix bugs in EFL, even assuming its maintainers would agree that these things are bugs (which they clearly didn't) - they had their own backlog and schedule. So they did the rant because they felt like they needed it, and they didn't really have the option of either #1 or #2 to fix anything.
Having watched more than one of my code babies be slaughtered by my colleagues in my career, I can certainly empathize as well. But I still think he came off poorly in that exchange.
