> He did more than that, as noted in the comment you replied to.
He really didn't. It matters nothing if you feel a commit breaks your code because you not only ignored the author but also failed to perform any sort of due diligence regarding what dependencies you ingest.
I mean, it was a major version bump. People blindly upgrade stuff without any regard about what goes in, and somehow that makes the guy who volunteered his work on a side project a villain?
There are a lot of red flags in this story, but the author of the colors flag ain't one of it.
The author already did that, and complained about fortune500 companies mooching their work without giving anything in return.
The author stated that people should fork the repo if they intended to keep using it.
The author made said statements a year ago. Is a year enough time to take action?
Now the author decided to do a major version release with a protest version of his own work, and that makes him a villain?