>It's a combo of 1) disagreeing with their choices and methods, and 2) the fact that those choices and methods have made his stuff much harder to avoid than the alternatives.
That doesn't follow unless you consider "developing a software that becomes popular" to be a method or a choice. Again, I don't know what you expect them to do or what other choice you expect them to make. Should they have suddenly quit once it was clear that it was going to become popular? What good would something like that do?
>That is why people don't like him (and, indeed, probably the main reason so many people know his name at all)
This also doesn't follow, it doesn't make sense and is extremely unprofessional. It isn't good for anyone's mental health to hold grudges like this. In order to attempt to have an unbiased view, you have to be able to separate the work from the person. Though I realize asking for this is probably an unwinnable battle in open source. Now that he doesn't work for Red Hat anymore it will be interesting to see people keep trying to blame both him and Red Hat for this.
