Cmon, it's such a minor change. Getting these PR's in means _you are_ a major player (atleast to some) and you might be able to drive change in a positive way. Why not jump on the opportunity?
The guy also seems quite rude for someone with "Rude people blocker" in his bio.
Sad to see such, ah, well-socialized people in open in source projects.
> I would rather see the different packager managers sit together and work on that standard. And especially big players should get involved, like the debian/ubuntu apt people, the fedora people, the nixpkg people, pip, node and all the others.
It’s almost as if any of the mentioned package managers has opt-out tracking code embedded in their CLIs.
1) It's not a standard at all. Some guy made a webpage and used the word "we". Even in the GitHub issues there was debate about what having this variable set would mean (e.g. should a call to a formatting service be blocked).
2) One maintainer pointed out that being an early adopter would force them into advocacy that they aren't prepared to do. Judging from how argumentative Sneak was being, there's probably an element of "we don't want to be the vanguard for this bully and his variable"
I do think it's very much a minimal-effort PR. It's hardly a PR at all: at the very least the tests and documentation should have been updated, and actually writing out some more rationale would help as well. I certainly wouldn't send a PR like this, at least not without the text "this is a proposal, and if accepted I will update the tests and documentation as well".
[1]: https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/search?q=HOMEBREW_NO_ANALYT...
Could be wrong though and the maintainer simply needed a vague excuse to not merge it. Haven’t completed a deep dive. I couldn’t be bothered to compare repository at the time of PR 2 yrs ago on mobile.