Until recently, we were doing proof-of-concept research, not product
development, and there are limited hours in the day. I also hasten to
say that the product of research is an article, the software artifact
serves as documentation of the experiment. In contrast, the product of
software development is software. It takes significant time and effort
to convert one to the other. Upstreaming code is of little scientific
interest. But things have changed for our project; we had no users in
2015 and we are now un-cutting corners that are appropriate for research
but inappropriate for production. For a research artifact with an
audience that knew the risks, we shipped a module because it was easier
to maintain and install than a kernel patch.
I understand that and with a big fat warning and documentation from
start I wouldn't have complained so vehemently.
Sorry for that innuendo. Now that my anger and general frustration about
this whole disaster have calmed down, I surely would not write that