" The process by which language libraries are maintained may have a bigger impact on language success than generally recognized.
A common event for developers is finding a bug in some crucial library function. The big question is, what happens then? There are several models:
1. The library is commercially supported. 1. The vendor is responsive to bug reports. The user submits a bug report and the problem is fixed. 2. The vendor is not responsive to bug reports. 2. The library is supported by volunteers. 1. There is an community supporting the library, with multiple people permitted to make updates. 2. The library is supported by a single person who is active in developing the library. 3. The library is supported by a single person who is not active, and no one else can change the code."
This clearly falls into his last category of 2.3...We are supposed to feel sympathy for some anonymous person on the Internet? I thought Hackernews was a venue for interesting ideas and innovative startups. (edited to include the first sentence)