This is such a strange post. Do you think `nimble` is like some kind of App Store? It seems to me like you have no idea what open source even is. The most common open source license is probably MIT, and basically all include "there is no guarantee any of this code works for any purpose at all".
> Why was this code base forked anyway? Why were these added functionalities > not contributed to the official package? Anyone can fork anything at any time for any reason, and there is no requirement to upstream anything. Nor should there be. If you think there should be, please explain how you'd like to enforce this and what the penalty should be (fine? prison? banning?). Also, what exactly is an "official package"? Unless it is in the language's standard library, you are completely at the mercy of the completely free effort of others. Whinging or support for it is such a strange thing to see supported in a niche language's community. Also, what exactly is a "finished" project / libarary? I've never seen one. Nim isn't finished. Rust isn't. Zig isn't. Hell C++ isn't. Let alone random open source libraries. I think you just expect that someone else has done all the work for you and wanted to whine that this isn't true in Nim. Well guess what? Nim is not as popular as the language you're coming from so you can't count on the immeasurable free effort of others you've taken for granted. It is polite for projects to explain the state they are in. Unfinished projects are incredibly valuable as a resource to learn from. The notion no one contributes is also false. Even if it is rare, it happens all the time. Again though, it happens in proportion to popularity, so Nim libraries are at a disadvantage vs JS or whatever. > Would you host incomplete, half baked code on your own site, next to your > resumé? Would you put code up there you can't, won't, will not maintain? Hell yes I would. I utterly disagree with this and it pains me to see. Hiding your code and using excuses like "half-baked" or whatever is just fear of judgement or laziness or whatever. Why couldn't someone benefit from seeing your approach and deciding to take the good from it for their own attempt at some functionality? Some people have this idea that open source means "a perfect library I can use for free" (not caring at all about the literal openness of the source). This is not the valuable part. The value is in "I can read how others have worked on this and learn from that to do better". Also the stb_truetype bindings stuff is so easy this whole thing is making a mountain out of a mole-hill.
