I agree with you here, but aren't we talking about something else?
> But now suddenly a tiny fix
It's an impactful fix. Now colorette can claim that there's no performance difference between colorette and nanocolors.
If this fix wasn't there, colorette would be objectively slower than nanocolors.
If I am the user, I will choose the one that is faster, so this is an important improvement.
> is worthy of demanding attribution for?
Yes. Are you against both attributing each other accurately?
Nanocolors currently attributes colorette for the whole fork (albeit after being called out).
Colorette still refuses to attribute nanocolors specifically for this important performance improvement, even after being called out.
> That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy.
Why not? The current topic is about improper attribution.
It's fair to look at improper attribution on both sides, not just one side.
Nano Colors mentioned Colorette in docs and Colorette author in LICENSE before Twitter thread. Colorette’s author asked m and I add the mention and agreed on the text.
It seems many other comments claiming that attribution is only provided after being called out.
Seems like people are confused by git rebase which change commit time in GitHub.
I agree with you here, but aren't we talking about something else?
> But now suddenly a tiny fix
It's an impactful fix. Now colorette can claim that there's no performance difference between colorette and nanocolors.
If this fix wasn't there, colorette would be objectively slower than nanocolors.
If I am the user, I will choose the one that is faster, so this is an important improvement.
> is worthy of demanding attribution for?
Yes. Are you against both attributing each other accurately?
Nanocolors currently attributes colorette for the whole fork (albeit after being called out).
Colorette still refuses to attribute nanocolors specifically for this important performance improvement, even after being called out.
> That's really not the moment to go nitpicking the other guy.
Why not? The current topic is about improper attribution.
It's fair to look at improper attribution on both sides, not just one side.