So, in short, you're firing your Nvidia users? Sometimes it has to be done, but you'll have to be very clear that you don't want Nvidia users.
Passive-aggressive attacks in an indirectly linked blog post against the userbase and Nvidia themselves are not sufficient, you will have to just be explicit about it in your GitHub README.
Also, this article contains pretty forwardly agressive attacks, I think.
Upon thinking about this, it's kind of like listing dependencies. I think you should make it clear in the README. I don't think the blog post is relevant in this context, as people likely won't read your blog post before installing Sway (and how would they know to do so, anyway?).
Do you mean cuda as a language v/s the latest opencl spec as a language, or implementations ? No one other than Intel is even implementing and updating OpenCL really, and nvidia will always push CUDA over opencl for lock ins. Which is kind of the same thing as every other argument that you can make for nvidia.
That said, if I were Nvidia, and the post was an example of "cooperating" and "working" with the Wayland developers, I don't think I'd go out of my way to cooperate.
You can certainly make the swap and the sentence still makes sense and is factually correct, but the context matters.
>That said, if I were (the Wayland developers), and (witnessed how Nvidia is) "cooperating" and "working" with (us), I don't think I'd go out of my way to cooperate.
Is also a valid point.
>nu-uh, I quit!
There are compromises you can make, most of them easy. None of this is my problem as the maintainer of Sway.