ftr, the “reference” parser is Remarkable, a project that is still very alive and will continue to be maintained.
Please, don’t confuse people in this thread. Your link contains code, written by me & Alex, but is outdated in scope of our progress. Also using term “reference” is such context is valid only in description of derivative works. Our work is still original, and not “fork”. Correct address is https://github.com/markdown-it/markdown-it . If you wish to promote project you have - please, do it separate.
The only thing that will confuse people is knowing that markdown-it is using code from Remarkable without respecting the license and copyright.
The only thing, that will confuse people, is that you have done nothing for project development, and have completely inadequate claims and behaviour. Everybody can check project history, and see who did everything.
According to the history vitaly did most of the work so I guess he can do whatever he wants with his code.
Why split the project rather than extending it?
Situation is very simple. He was sent to hell for highly offensive comments to my address on github, and email with threats to remove my access to his repo. After that his “participation” in my eyes reduced from zero to negative.
There are no any kind of split from my side. We (me and Alex) continue to do everything we did before. And Jon can do anything he wish with his repo, if he can.
2 Likes
Reference parser is a tool you can compare behavior of a custom parser to. In this case, the reference parser is CommonMark.
And in the rest 40% of cases people use HTML because of the compatibility issues between different parsers.
If you have something that’s need to be displayed the same way in different places (e.g. on github and on the website), it doesn’t matter how extendable one parser is, because you can’t extend another one.
1 Like
You are right. That’s a different area. I was speaking about standalone project like forums, blogs, where portablity not required, but extendability should exist.
I’m sure he’ll try to merge all your improvements and sprinkle some minor stuff on top and capitalize over the more known name. At least hopefully he won’t be able to start a smear campaign against you.
Reference parser is a tool you can compare behavior of a custom parser to…
@rlidwka thanks for clarifying.
Situation is very simple. He was sent to hell for highly offensive comments to my address on github, and email with threats to remove my access to his repo. After that his “participation” in my eyes reduced from zero to negative.
I gave you three separate warnings for abrasive behavior to the community and then to me. The last email said I won’t give you another warning.
I’m sure he’ll try to merge all your improvements and sprinkle some minor stuff on top and capitalize over the more known name. At least hopefully he won’t be able to start a smear campaign against you.
@lu_zero why would anyone do such a thing? Vitaly contacted me and asked me to maintain the project.
So let’s get some things straight.
- I had a project called remarked GitHub - jonschlinkert/remarked: No longer maintained, see remarkable instead!
- Vitaly wrote the following emails to me. Prior to this, I had never heard of Vitaly. Read for yourself.
- and my reply
Now that Remarkable is doing well, Vitaly has changed his mind. Let’s just call it what it is. Since when did the number of contributions that a developer makes to a project change ownership of a copyright? When did that give a developer the right to remove someone’s name from a license?
Regardless, it’s disheartening to see this kind of attitude from fellow open source developers.
Oh, and @lu_zero, I’m the guy at the top of this list: http://blog.modulus.io/growth-of-npm-infographic. I take offense to your comments. I’ve given as much as I can to the open source community. Vitaly was not trying to do me favors, he contacted me for a reason.
Merry Christmas
This and having a look at the github for remarkable triggered my comment. We are going to see the same modus operandi with io.js.
Posting emails from August to relate them to something happening in December doesn’t seem that cool.
Having contributed to opensource doesn’t make you any better or worse by default and I’d love to be proved wrong and see Markdown-it and Remarkable diverge completely (more diverse implementations are a strenght for CommonMark).
You forgot to add full text of your comment, that you edited later on github, after been sent to hell. It’s hardly comparable to anything. And when someone sent “just a email”, they don’t follow with apologises and explainations about bad mood, bad time and so on.
Man, you forgot one little thing. I’m not your worker and do not depend on you. If you can’t control youself - that should not be my problem and problem for things i do. I can decide myself, what is good for me, and your participation is not needed.
And again, you forgot one little thing. I’ve contacted you because you did remared. And there was talks, that you will help with testing, checking compatibility, and with creating docs. You given such kinds of promisses very well. I’ve searched a developper, not manager. Later you replied many times that you are “busy” and so on. Or with advices that someone should “help” you like this. You abandoned to to things, that you’ve been expected to do. Everything was done without you. And even that time i didn’t said anything, until you finally written me completely inadequate shit. You gone too far.
You can dream as much as you wish, but agreement about collaboration is not the same as official copyright transfer. There are no free cheese. Placing code to your repo does not give you exclusive ownership for all i do. It’s not my problem, that you did not committed anything valuable to repo. Now at new place you have exactly you did - zero.
Words. Just vitriol and bitterness. No substance
Come back when you have something more serious, instead of separate letters out of context.
By the way, that talk and plans were about “remarked”, not about “remarkable”. “remarked” is not related to commonmark and much more simple.
It does appear that Markdown-it is violating the Remarkable licence. In the LICENSE:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
The only thing that the Markdown-it project would need to do to fix this is add Jon Schlinkert’s name back into the LICENSE.
Licence requirements are applied to derivative works. Markdown-it is not derivative work.
You can reread published screenshots and see, that my words about copyright was said about using remarked (owned and copyrighted by Jon), not about remarkable. But remarked was not used to publish code and make new releases.
From what I see, Markdown-it was derived from Remarkable, a project where Jon Schlinkert was listed in the licence going back to September. Subsequent commits between this one and the start of the Markdown-it project would have referred to that Remarkable licence, no?
You mix different things. Remarkable is not registered trademark, company and so on. It’s just a word. Code still has real owners, determined by authorship, if copyright was not transfered. If Jon’s name was added “in advance for future merits” - that is not equal to copyright transfer. I can add you, lu_zero, president of the moon, but that will not mean anything.
If i’d removed copyright, added by another person, or Jon had a tons of commits in repo - that whould be completely another story. But i just fixed copyright content, committed by myself.
Jon try to prove the fact of copyright transfer, using my words, beed said for another case.
Again, according to git:
commit c8be724b3f7ca21ccfd51e9f2359f52a2dc9289e
Author: Vitaly Puzrin <vitaly@rcdesign.ru>
Date: Tue Sep 2 16:11:34 2014 +0400
First commit
That makes Vitaly Purzrin the initiator of the project,
commit 1893f3271f0b01e47ac1ca385bcde016252128f0
Author: jonschlinkert <dev@sellside.com>
Date: Mon Oct 27 19:21:16 2014 -0400
edits to readme. fixes typos in code comments.
This is the first commit of jonschlinkert. (notice the date)
git log --author "jonschlinkert" --oneline
851efea 1.6.0
0ab4791 update eslint rules, metadata in package.json
bc07661 rename to `example.js`
f1de27b linting, formatting consistency
aabb42d rename `samples` to `fixtures`
44f3a48 rename benchmark.js to index.js
983eafe move nodeca ref to bottom. add heading
6632743 clean up formatting
5c1ad23 minor formatting, update root files
ce652ca formatting/grammar in contributing.md
8f68d94 update ignore patterns
6ff1c17 split out rules
381d560 make variables consistent
89c2c9f just use `remarkable` for npm search
1893f32 edits to readme. fixes typos in code comments.
The contributions from this person are not that creative according to the commit messages.
Probably I’m missing something, but this small amount of digging boils down to somebody bullying @vitaly .