I suspect I was just unclear with my comment[0]. I do mean to say that even if there is merit to the person's complaints, it is a valid response to tell that person to go and do it themselves. I'm not convinced that they'll make something half as good and that's very relevant if they're going to be complaining. I'm less likely to take a person seriously if all they can add to a topic is, "This is bad and someone needs to make it better!" while remaining unwilling or unable to be that "someone". The minimum would be even just a suggestion of what to do instead.

Anyway, I actually think this is rather controversial with valid opposing perspectives, so I don't intend to invalidate yours! This is just where I land.

[0]

> if this individual doesn't like it then I think it's totally appropriate to challenge [said individual] to do it better

Gotcha. A couple rejoinders. First: I think it's important to be able to name a problem, even if it's too hard to propose a solution right away, without people yelling at you to propose a solution or STFU. That just becomes, again, a cheap way to avoid acknowledging hard problems.

Second: that's still a much more reasonable objection than "just fork the community", which usually has costs ranging from obnoxious to crippling. The mere attempt could destroy lots of value for no benefit, and even if it succeeds things are likely to suck for a while for everyone involved. This is not an appropriate option to push just because there's an alleged process problem. Not even if the complainer genuinely should have proposed a solution, offered to do the work, or whatever.

What are the merits of the complaint, though? That it takes a long time for people to merge confusing code on undocumented hardware?

I'm specifically not claiming anything about this particular complaint, only about your response.