Closed Jayman2000 closed 5 months ago
I have no opposition to submitting upstream, but my changes are for the most part out of scope with the current goals. I have a pile of fixes I've been sitting on for a while from the InjectD3 project, I just feel like it would be nice to get them out to people.
my changes are for the most part out of scope with the current goals.
What are the current goals of the upstream project?
ATM they're working on a relatively conservative 1.5 stable baseline that would then be used for feature development in the future
ATM they're working on a relatively conservative 1.5 stable baseline that would then be used for feature development in the future
At the end of the day, you can just sync your fork with upstream anyway, so you'll have all of their work from upstream as well as your own.
At the end of the day, you can just sync your fork with upstream anyway, so you'll have all of their work from upstream as well as your own.
See, this is part of my dilemma. If I contribute upstream, then everyone (including the forks) will benefit from my contributions. The problem is: upstream is picky, and they’ve already rejected some of my ideas. If I contribute to this project, my changes have a better change of being accepted, but then the contributions won’t make it to everybody.
That’s why I asked this question in the first place. I’m kind of stuck between multiple projects and I don’t know where to contribute.
Why did you choose to create a fork rather than contributing these features upstream?
I’m not trying to argue for or against forking. I just don’t really understand what the benefit is.