> hate this. "we don't want this on principle... but we would accept it if you did it yourself!" just say you don't feel like it! don't act like it's a bad thing except for when somebody else does it for you, that's just dishonest.

What is there to hate here, I don't understand?

They first provide a concise overview of the current situation. Then how they personally feel about it. Finally they leave it open and end it with "If you want it badly enough, we'll accept outside contributions for it".

They're not saying that they're against the feature in principle, they're saying that they themselves don't plan to spend time implementing it, but if users really want it and contribute the feature itself, they'll be happy to maintain it once merged.

This seems like the ideal solution? What would be better here?