I think the apology is here because the author of the PR doesn't want to revert it. As you can see, it's still merged: https://github.com/reactiveui/splat/blob/b930a34badfb2164f38...

Edit: as lots of people said, I was on an older version of the file. I'm not sure how I did this, but I should have double-checked, especially since there was some base64 stuff in the URL.

You're looking at the older version of the file. Here's the complete history:

https://github.com/reactiveui/splat/commits/main/src/Directo...

So it was merged, then reverted almost immediately, and then reimplemented by the project maintainers in the manner they preferred (without a new dependency).

That's a small part of a much larger trust issue with the foundation: https://github.com/dotnet-foundation/Home/discussions/38

I did not see any indication that she was asked to revert the PR. It seemed like it was more just about that she felt it was OK to bypass the policy.

And, regardless of whether this particular PR Is reverted or not, whether there's anything to prevent her or any other board member from doing this again.

It does not seem like she did it as a Board member, she did it because she felt like she was still an Active Maintainer of that project. It seems like the project feels like even if she is still a Maintainer she still was wrong to merge without discussion.

It was reverted in https://github.com/reactiveui/splat/commit/a502b596d4c4a45a7...

I can still cut it down to three words:

Sorry not sorry.

wdym take everything less seriously? the internet is as real as real life, people who donate their time to work on OSS deserve respect and the same cordiality that they would irl.

i think her apology is a wash but that doesn't mean that people shouldn't act without empathy or reason.

you can enjoy not living in the world-- just go off grid and don't try to push that people can act without remorse or consequence :)

The comments beneath the apology make the point (I couldn't quite follow it all) that this wasn't really an apology at all.

The lengthy word count might tend to confirm that,as you say a genuine apology should be terse and direct.

> The lengthy word count might tend to confirm that,as you say a genuine apology should be terse and direct.

I've seen enough short apologies posted here and the comments below usually pointed out the lack of effort, the lack of commitment to do better, the lack of pointing out errors and the likes. Any form of apology will get some flak just based on whatever form it took, so I don't think one can judge just based on word count.

I agree. Like others here I don't know the context, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but her first paragraph seems about as sincere and direct an apology as anyone could reasonably want.

After that she talks about broader organizational stuff which isn't intended to take away from her own apology ("Separate from this personal misstep...").

It's a shame that based on the reactions in the linked thread, many seem unable to take what seems like a genuine apology at face value

From what I can see, it's an apology for a tiny symptom of the real problem. Being a genuine apology for that tiny thing, with no apology for the bigger issues, leads to a rejection of the entire post. In that context, if it's accurate, I think rejection is pretty reasonable.

Yeah, it's very hard to see the context, and maybe this really is management being horrible, but yeah, don't know, seems like small stuff to me: A PR that got pushed through, and moving to Github enterprise. Obviously, there was a breakdown in process and communication, but I'm sure Linus has done much worse with Linux.

Yeah, from an outsiders perspective, the apology felt pretty heartfelt (and humbling too, especially for issues that seem somewhat routine), but as mentioned, maybe there are other details we're not hearing?

... btw, these roles on community foundations/boards can be hell, because the community begins to vent at every mistake (and there will always be mistakes). Devs of .net, maybe give the person a break? She's a person.

When it's 4000 words, they're saying "sorry, not sorry" and expecting to get away with it.

“Sorry you’re upset”

It's not /just/ about the PR, the whole foundation has pulled all the projects it had access to into the DNF organization without telling anyone about it.

> people need to take everything much less seriously

I am starting to think there is a part of (some?) people's brains that needs to take something seriously. When all basic needs are met: food, warmth, security etc., problems are invented to give that part of the brain something to do.

welcome to open source, it’s just this thread over and over again every day

It is now an expected requirement nowadays to write a 4000+ essay to apply for redemption from the public.

Saying "sorry" just isn't enough to absolve your "misdeeds", whatever they might be.