Ben's answers on this have always been deeply unsatisfactory:
1) a) the merge was accomplished trivially by another maintainer; the idea that there was "more work" required of ben is demonstrably false.
1) b) he undertook more work to revert the existing commit, also see 2)
2) a) at the time he reverted the commit, there was substantial explanation on the issue on why it was important.
2) b) because Ben failed to check with his own colleague, he was unaware the commit had in fact been signed off - there was no rule problem here, apart from "not telling Ben".
3) lots of people do nice things and are assholes in other circumstances.
Apart from the sarcastic tone of his post ("if this gets us scores of female contributors" indeed), the grapevine says he was pretty deeply offensive to Issac over the issue as well.
1) a) the merge was accomplished trivially by another maintainer; the idea that there was "more work" required of ben is demonstrably false.
1) b) he undertook more work to revert the existing commit, also see 2)
2) a) at the time he reverted the commit, there was substantial explanation on the issue on why it was important.
2) b) because Ben failed to check with his own colleague, he was unaware the commit had in fact been signed off - there was no rule problem here, apart from "not telling Ben".
3) lots of people do nice things and are assholes in other circumstances.
Apart from the sarcastic tone of his post ("if this gets us scores of female contributors" indeed), the grapevine says he was pretty deeply offensive to Issac over the issue as well.