Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
-
This should be top comment if true.
This is a great case for a “reader added context” feature for Lemmy, if it could be implemented in a decent way.
-
Dude just stated how much of his free time he is willing to provide to others for free and put a line on what he is willing to commit.
And somehow this thread thinks that's harsh or petty?
Is literally any person complaining about this guy setting reasonable boundaries paying him money to do this work?
And somehow this thread thinks that's harsh or petty?
Is literally any person complaining about this guy setting reasonable boundaries paying him money to do this work?
No they're a bunch of entitled assholes who need a fucking wake up call.
-
Yeah... But then it sucks for anyone not running Arch (btw) or derivative distros. I really don't have a dog in this merge conflict but really would feel bad for any packager maintainers.
but really would feel bad for any packager maintainers.
It's already unpackageable because of the license anyway.
The only "legit" way to get the emulator is their provided AppImage bundle, and nothing else. The author also has a rant about Flatpak being broken and unreliable and refusing to support that, so...
-
It sure would be a shame if his software was covered by the gpl because it's statically linked against Qt or FFMpeg or any other library...
-
itt: a bunch of entitled Linux youths that don't understand burnout or QOL.
dude has set a limit to what he wants or is willing to do. still gets called a bitch for defining the line and is still called an asshole.
some of y'all even bring up multiple cases of other foss devs doing/saying the same thing, continue to call them assholes.
There's a pattern here...but I'm just too blinded by the brilliancy of my distro to see it...I just cannot wrap my head around an emulator dev who isn't daily driving Linux...
Damn people are really misunderstanding this comment. Legitimately just don't know anyone who is involved in FOSS projects who doesn't primarily use Linux. Not really passing judgement here, just making an observation.
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
Disregard my comment. I was being an ass. They're doing a fun and silly thing and I don't need to hate on it.
-
Arch users can be the most annoying arrogant and conceited people to exist online.
Ðe maintainers are ðe same. I don't know if it's ðe chicken, or ðe egg, but distro maintainers do tend to set ðe tone.
And, yeah, I use Arch everywhere, because so far everyþing else is worse.
Stop trying to make eth or thorn happen. You just make your comments harder to read
-
Seriously, this thread is honestly vile and these people are a perfect example as to why this is happening.
How they are this blind to their own toxicity is beyond me
it's honestly why I don't open source any of my projects.
like, I want to make the world a better place but at the same time it cannot cost me my QOL because some entitled punk thinks they can demand shit from me.
-
While users can be demanding, this reads like a very immature response. Going out of your way to block support and prohibit packaging, which you can let others do with 0 seconds of your time, is kinda rude.
Author may have been harassed for all I know, but this is still an emotional response. They could have just said "yeah I'm not supporting this at all, figure it out yourselves if you want to" rather than actively blocking Linux functionality/packaging, which is what this sounds like.
As an open source developer, I’d love to have had contributors to help package my apps. It was killing me maintaining everything by myself. It sounds like the control issues I had when I first had contributors, where I didn’t want others to touch my babies too much when people actually started writing code.
-
Dude has a history of acting bipolar.
You shouldn't stigmatize a disability. Especially when that isn't specific to the disability.
-
He explicitly states that it is not 0% of his time due to being bombarded with support requests.
Are you volunteering to field the support requests?
What I'm saying is that a more reasonable stance is to say "package as-is or fork it if you want I will put 0 effort to accomodate".
Others have clarified that they are not as extreme as I thought though so maybe that's fine.
I just think that from a perspective this seems like a "people in X country keep writing gay fanfic about my book and asking if A and B characters are gay. so I'm gonna stop selling there and also destroy All copies left in their language. Because I'm a petty man-child".
But, once again, I hope this is not what's actually happening here and my reading was off.
-
I just cannot wrap my head around an emulator dev who isn't daily driving Linux...
Damn people are really misunderstanding this comment. Legitimately just don't know anyone who is involved in FOSS projects who doesn't primarily use Linux. Not really passing judgement here, just making an observation.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'm all for jerking around on Windows folks to use Linux in jest and fun, but to purposely shit on a major contributor of any foss for not using Linux makes my blood boil.
honestly, I hope the dev reads this and takes my advice.
as a Linux guy, run dude. fuck these assholes. they don't deserve your time, your talent, or your efforts. gank your shit, rewrite the license, and block any Linux use. and make sure you call out the distro(s) responsible. sometimes assholes have to be put in their place to learn anything. even then, if history tells us anything they're just going to go poison some other poor dev and forget about you.
-
Imagine if Linux developers building the libraries this was built on where as petty.
big words from an anonymous user who has never contributed to foss outside of a whiney bug report or two.
-
What I'm saying is that a more reasonable stance is to say "package as-is or fork it if you want I will put 0 effort to accomodate".
Others have clarified that they are not as extreme as I thought though so maybe that's fine.
I just think that from a perspective this seems like a "people in X country keep writing gay fanfic about my book and asking if A and B characters are gay. so I'm gonna stop selling there and also destroy All copies left in their language. Because I'm a petty man-child".
But, once again, I hope this is not what's actually happening here and my reading was off.
You cannot fork the current project because it is not open source anymore. A fork of the last available GPL release would be possible, though.
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
But then someone else would have to maintain it for Linux, and Arch Linux specifically. That's a lot of work, especially as things diverge from the features intended for an emulator (/s)
-
I really liked the widescreen option. Do any other PSX emulators have it integrated like Duckstation does?
I don’t know how Duckstation does it, but Retroarch cores (Beetle/Mednafen and PCSX) support widescreen?
-
I can sympathize with being frustrated but that's silly
-
I'm all for jerking around on Windows folks to use Linux in jest and fun, but to purposely shit on a major contributor of any foss for not using Linux makes my blood boil.
honestly, I hope the dev reads this and takes my advice.
as a Linux guy, run dude. fuck these assholes. they don't deserve your time, your talent, or your efforts. gank your shit, rewrite the license, and block any Linux use. and make sure you call out the distro(s) responsible. sometimes assholes have to be put in their place to learn anything. even then, if history tells us anything they're just going to go poison some other poor dev and forget about you.
Just open source it and leave it to the Linux community.
I understand not wanting to support something you don't use yourself.
-
It's actually not within their rights (I am NOT a lawyer)
GPL code is still owned by the person who wrote it, that includes contributors who have made a PR. Unless they all signed CLAs (Contributor License Agreements) to hand over their copyright to the repository owner, the repository owner does not hold copyright for this code, and as such can't legally change the license. They can use and distribute it as specified in the license terms of the GPL, but that excludes changing the license.
I remember the maintainer claiming they had permission from all contributors to change the license but I can't find a link to it now.
-
big words from an anonymous user who has never contributed to foss outside of a whiney bug report or two.
Hi, I'm a subsystem maintainer for the Drupal project, a security team member, and over the years have helped maintain several of the largest projects in the ecosystem. I've also contributed to a number of open source projects over the years and have a lot of experience collaborating with maintainers to get fixes committed going back to early amd64 fixes coming out of testing in the gentoo project before Intel even had a real 64bit platform. I've got a pretty good feel for how this works and it's safe to say FLOSS is kinda my day job.
