Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
-
Too many FOSS users are toxicly entitled... It ruins things for everyone.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It isn't toxic* entitlement to seek tech support on the platform the developer offers tech support on.
Edit: added "toxic" for clarification
-
I see a few top level comments agreeing with the sentiment that users are being entitled or abusive, but what are they actually referring to? The linked image certainly has no evidence of such behavior. Someone who claims to be the developer filed a deletion request for the duckstation-git AUR package on the AUR and they say:
Every time, it turns into abuse towards me, as you can also see in the comments for the package.
I read through a few pages of the comments here and they're mostly people talking about fixing issues with the package, and what to do about the dev purposely breaking the build... I only found a single message that could be called abuse:
@eugene, not really but i suspect it's an uphill battle, check the commit message: https://github.com/stenzek/duckstation/commit/30df16cc767297c544e1311a3de4d10da30fe00c
FWIW, I'm moving to pcsx-redux, I rather run a little bit less advanced PSX emulator than software by this upstream asshat. Regardless, much thanks for maintaining the AUR package so far.
And even this is not a good example of what stenzek is describing. For one, it's obviously a reaction to stenzek's hostile changes and not the sort of user coming for support and being abusive that stenzek is talking about. The user is also explicitly moving to a different emulator and not expecting any change from duckstation.
The more I look into it the more it looks like the dev is being a jerk and demanding, doesn't understand what he's complaining about. And lying about getting abuse that appears to honestly be self inflicted.
It's his project and his right to do with it what he may. But this seriously just appears to be a self inflicted man problem he's complaining about.
Zero sympathy honestly. Just be a damn adult and do what you need to do. Don't shead crocodiles tears for sympathy points.
-
I'd go further, you should help with the development. Seems like some people would rather spend hours hounding a developer to implement their thing, rather than figuring out how to do it themselves...
Except the Duckstation developer changed the license to where they don't accept contributions from others, so we couldn't help even if we wanted to.
-
Linux pros: FOSS, free, private, secure, etc.
Linux cons: Linux users
Don't forget Linux devs are also Linux users. And they are just as much a con as the non dev users!
-
Could be a good feature to add to PieFed, which is built on Python specifically to allow more developers to have access to building extensions and plugins.
Programming language isn’t a problem as much as the mechanics of the implementation.
I mean, how does it work on Twitter? Do they have oldschool language models parse upvoted comments and automatically generate it? Basically the options are:
-
Involve some kind of ML model for partial automation, which is not going to go over well with Lemmy users.
-
Leave the UAC completely to mods, which is going to both overburden them and make power-tripping issues far worse
-
-
I'm far from an expert on licenses, but logic tells me that any version that was released with the previous license is still under that previous license. So it's probably okay to fork from a previous version to maintain linux support?
wrote last edited by [email protected]That's actually the version that's in the AUR, since they can't put newer (fixed) code in there from the new versions.
-
Dev here who also happens to support Linux, and while Linux has its own challenges (whoever came up with the libevdev API, should not allowed to come up with any other API's), I think it's good to support Linux natively regardless. GNOME devs however should stop forcing their UX ideas onto others sometimes even outside of Linux. One of them when I was asking about how to I make the Alt key on Windows to stop it trying to open the nonexistent menu bar, then they told me to "just add one". I'm developing games, not just desktop apps, where the alt key isn't expected to open a menu bar. I then got told that it's "expected behavior" (Hungarian here, I'd like to expect that both alt keys are for accessing a second set of gliphs, and one of them isn't a dedicated "menu key"), and that games like Unreal Tournament "did it already" (that one used the escape key for menus).
The gnome team is worse then apple and Microsoft.
At least they own the entire OS they force their changes on.
The gnome team just fucks with everyone everywhere and gives zero fucks otherwise.
-
If I give something for free, it's my rules. Simple as that. Don't like it? don't accept it.
Linus is often a dick. He even acknowledges it. Don't like it? Well, there are other OS.
I'm not like that, I like being helpful, I actually do many volunteer hours a week, but...
I do hate entitlement. I don't see these people giving Microsoft as hard a time.Lets keep the Karen constrained, please.
Linus is an ass, but he also doesn't make problems for other people then blame them for those problems he made himself.
Like this dev is doing. It's not remotely the same situation.
This guy is fucking with his users, then telling them to fuck off and then bitching people don't respect him or follow his rules.
While denying he is fucking with people and trying to claim he's being harassed.
That's /not/ how that works. It's your project your rules. But you also can't be a fuckwad and deny it. While expecting anyone to respect you or what you say.
-
It isn't toxic* entitlement to seek tech support on the platform the developer offers tech support on.
Edit: added "toxic" for clarification
No, but carrying the grudge this long and vocally leaves me to wonder if the story is as crisp as put forth.
And FOSS die hards put many people off of lemmy early on.
Seek? Yes. Expect? No.
-
I don't think you quite understand how this works. No distro ever asks third party programmers to create packages for them—that's the job of the distro's own team, or of enthusiasts using the distro. All the distro packagers want or need from the original programmer is the source code and enough documentation to get it to compile. They take it from there.
Did you read the text? This guy was providing a package because the default one was broken and he's fed up of dealing with complaints. And the solution to that is just flatpak the thing and tell users to use that regardless of dist.
-
This is so lame for the arch community, like
I use arch btws are supposed to be the most hardcore power users and they bugged a dev that badly! I don't know how many tutorial I saw about compiling arch and building everything yourself into a minimal setup.You can't give me shit for using Manjaro for as long as I did, GLAD I LEFT.
::: spoiler can I say something a little stupid
Thx!So I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with ignoring emails. Emails are a kinda public way for anyone to start a conversation with you. As developers, we include our emails in commits — but we don’t have to. I don’t think GitHub even checks whether the email addresses in commits are valid.
So yeah, if you have a valid reason to reach out to a developer, go ahead. But if that developer disagrees or doesn’t want to respond, that’s just how it is — you can’t make someone email you back.
I’m just being consistent with myself. I always tell my friends and family about the importance of the block button, and I’ll say the same thing here: just ignore it. And in this case someone would have eventually fixed the problem and submitted a PR.
~sry if I was condescending~
:::wrote last edited by [email protected]Manjaro was my first Arch distro and I enjoyed it until I found out about the issues with packages always being out of date. Switched over to EndeavourOS and have been loving it so far. It's been "just working" for like two years now and even my 70 year old parents don't notice a difference from Windoze when they borrow my laptop. In fact my dad is using it to do some Quicken work today (which was an adventure to get working. WineHQ community was super helpful though)
-
Tbf a substantial amount of voters did see the comment - at the time of writing, 297 upvotes on the comment vs 483 upvotes on the post, or ~61%. So actually most people do dig through the comments, if the upvote count is something to go by at least.
Anyone who doesn't read comments is unlikely to read reader added context, so you're probably not getting a large amount of the remaining 39% of people to get the context just because you add some extra UI feature.
Besides, explaining the context is a much longer affair than a title and just wouldn't fit. It's not like I would even say that the title of this post is misleading in the first place, it's actually pretty to-the-point.
There's also a chance that people will get the wrong idea about posts without the context - i.e. that posts without reader added context are super truthful somehow. I feel that people should rather accept that all titles of a few sentences are missing context. That is after all the point of a title - to summarize and bring only the most important information, which inevitably leads to a loss of context.
wrote last edited by [email protected]That doesn’t count views/impressions that didn’t vote, nor the initial voters that drove the comment to the visibility of the front page. It reminds me way too much of social media that goes viral before it has any chance to be refuted, and it’s already left its impact.
This is a UX “mistake” made by countless platforms (but also a feature if pure engagement is the goal). These kinds of attention flows are extremely important to Lemmy's future health, lest it take the same trajectory as others.
-
It's crazy that this is legal.
Most software is like this, but you also don't get to look at the source code either.
-
I'm immediately skeptical of developers who use Windows. At best, it makes me question their judgement.
Windows isn't exactly my cup of tea either, but at the end of the day an operating system is just a tool to do what you need to do on a computer.
Linux is my choice, but everyone's got their preference.
-
Too many FOSS users are toxicly entitled... It ruins things for everyone.
Too many FOSS devs are toxically entitled... It ruins things for everyone.
Remember developers are also users and all users suck.
This guy's an a****** and is complaining when people treat him like an a****** he has no need to share his project if he's free to keep it to himself. But if you go stand on a public Street, share something for free and then b**** at everybody who comes up to you. You're the problem, not the user
-
It looks like the change happened nearly a year ago, and no one's kicked up a fuss, so either it was done properly (i.e. past contributors were contacted and consented to the licence change, and any that didn't had their contributions replaced), or there's a big problem once a past contributor notices.
It doesn't make it any more legal to fork the project without going back to the last GPL3 commit, though, as any contributions after the license change have to be assumed to be covered by the new licence, so the combined work would be under an invalid licence (as the old and new licences aren't compatible) rather than being still covered by the old licence.
Normally, I'd completely dismiss the possibility that a licence change like this could have been done properly, but Stenzek is associated with Dolphin Emulator, which did manage to pull off a switch from GPL2 to GPL3+ by emailing lots of people and replacing a lot of code.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Make a fork that supports Linux as satire since the whole situation is so crazy.
Edit: The joke being you could argue it's fair use.
-
You're right, the license is Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (weird choice for a code license, but OK)
It's not an open source license. Even CC warns against it because it isn't a free media license.
-
People just expect open source devs that do this shit in their free time with absolutely no compensation to bend over for them and do everything they please. The good thing about open source development is that you can just help with the development yourself.
Normally you'd be right, but in this case the guy just actually does have a history of being an a****** to everybody. This is very much a case of a developer being the problem.
He has a history of starting s*** being an a****** and then complaining when everyone else is an a****** to him.
That's not even getting into. Basically every problem he is complaining about is of his own making or his own ignorance.
The whole aur problem is because of his own, very likely illegal license change
-
I'd go further, you should help with the development. Seems like some people would rather spend hours hounding a developer to implement their thing, rather than figuring out how to do it themselves...
He changed the license so no one can legally help him. He kind of put himself in this position. And very likely did so illegally
-
Did you read the text? This guy was providing a package because the default one was broken and he's fed up of dealing with complaints. And the solution to that is just flatpak the thing and tell users to use that regardless of dist.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I don't think we can count the AUR repository as the "default package" because:
- AUR is a community driven project, for users, by users. Repos are not maintained by the Arch team.
- Arch user needs to explicitely get out of their way to access and use AUR, it is not enabled by default
- AUR repos are not even packages (usually). They are build-instructions. There are specific -bin repos that provide packaged binaries, but that was not the case here, because the emulators license doesn't allow that.
The issue here was that stenzek moved the emulator to a source-available license, which does not allow Arch to provide packages in their package repo. So people were using build instructions to build the emulator from source. And when that caused issues because something broke, people came to stenzek for support instead of the person maintaining the build instrucions.
