Brian,
We understand the frustration for sure but it's better to have a conversation of "here's what didn't work for me", "here are some potential things to make it better", "adding xyz to the documentation would have made it better".
Better for the conversation to leave out the negative comments and give constructive criticism.
Can you point out where I had negative comments and didn't give constructive feedback?
The only reason any feedback was given was because it was requested by Davis Hoover. My initial comment, which I still feel was valid, was that the recommendation to use `git grep` was not a useful one due to the amount of intimate knowledge required about OpenCPI to understand the output.
I was then given the reason for the abstraction, and how it solves certain problems. I was also invited to supply feedback, which I feel I did without being negative, identifying ideal solution scenarios for my use cases, and providing links to examples I find useful that OpenCPI might be able to adopt.
I want to see OpenCPI succeed, and I want to be able to use it. I don't mean to be obtuse and I don't mean to be condescending. My intention for the feedback was not to bash OpenCPI but to point out major deficiencies from my point of view. If I did this in a way that was perceived as negative, let me know where and I will try to correct future interactions.
Brian