Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.
-
Yeah, PS2 is standalone business still. And in its defense, PCSX2 is super user friendly as a standalone package and supports most of the shared stuff you'd want from Retroarch anyway.
-
No, Maintainer comes off as pissed off for dealing with a lot of headaches created by others creating a version he doesnt support, and doesnt want, yet is dealing with all the backlash and headache of.
and to try to stem the tide, he created a package just for those people.. and they refuse to use it, continuing to use the broken version, and bombarding him with headaches over something that he, again, does not control.
Only liars would say they wouldnt be pissed off dealing with such a situation.
While I understand and respect his feeling, in my limited experience, people that don't like when distributions package their software are often deranged.
Still, if you are using OS packages, your first stop should be OS fora / bug trackers, not upstream. Whoever is producing the distro/OS packages should engage with upstream if and when that's necessary. Upstream, especially small upstreams, really shouldn't be expected to deal with the craziness of Nix, Arch, Debian, and SteamOS all at the same time.
Users are, IME, mostly annoying. Sometimes (not often) I'm glad none of my software has any. At least at work I can point at the Teams / Slack / Jira conversation to prove they specifically asked for something completely different last week and I implemented that.
-
You know, you don't need to censor yourself on here. I don't think anybody's going to be offended if you just write "shit" or "asshole".
I thought they said ahunter2.
-
~11 months ago they relicensed from GPL 3 to CC BY-NC-ND.
Oh. Time for a fork. -ND variants are not Free Software / Open Source.
-
Too many FOSS users are toxicly entitled... It ruins things for everyone.
It's more than just FOSS users. It's "The Internet" in general. At least two of the modding scenes I've been in have had multiple developers (and artists and translators) just quit due to their users aggressively complaining about the stuff they give away for free.
Of course, it doesn't get that much better when people have to pay for things -- ask customer service representatives how much toxicity they see from unsatisfied customers.
-
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.
You are the only one here carrying on a grudge and being vocal about it.
Are you a big fan of FOSS? How much are you going to support FOSS developers today hmmm?
-
That's not how AUR works, it builds from source using instructions, it's not repackaging at all
The point is that someone posted this guy’s project to the AUR with a badly written PKGBUILD and it was failing to build. This led to him getting tons of support requests which he could not help with since he doesn’t control that AUR build.
He also couldn’t get it removed from AUR without giving the admins his personal information. Completely understandable given the history of console companies going after emulator developers. The guy has been doxxed and seems close to being run right out of the open source community by a bunch of zealots.
-
OK I didn't know that, stupid move on his part then...
What do you mean by likely illegally?Not a license expert but he changed the license to a more restricted one but did not ask contributors which the previous license may have required.
-
Oh. Time for a fork. -ND variants are not Free Software / Open Source.
Having read a lot of the thread it sounds like that's sort of what's going on with the version on the AUR. Sounds like it is the old GPL v3 version and the dev doesn't wanna put the new CC BY-NC-ND version on the AUR themselves because they don't want to make an account there (understandable, not saying they should have to).
The whole situation is sort of sad, but ultimately devs working on free (as in money, I now -ND is not libre) software need to do what they need to do to remain sane. If it's a CC BY-NC-ND emulator without Linux support versus no emulator at all I think we'd all want the first.
I hope this thread can be an eye opener for folks to remember to treat volunteer devs with respect. (Not implying anyone here was part of the problem.)
-
Let me add to context:
This developer hates the FOSS spirit & tells users to fuck off when they complain. There, done.
He took an open source project and made it source available. I don't blame people for being upset.
-
The answer for this guy and other people stretched by supporting Linux is to say it's flatpak or nothing. Stop trying to build for each dist because it's not sustainable. If someone on a dist wants to maintain a package then let them take the heat if it is broken.
I use the Duckstation flatpak funny enough
-
The licence doesn't permit derivative works, so no forks and no downstream packages.
True but there is a workaround: a patchset to a specific upstream git commit and local compilation. Pretty much what PKGBUILD already does. LAME was developed this way for years. It was a patchset to reference source code under a nonfree license.
-
He's not obligated to provide that support. But the tone sure makes it seem expected.
And android users are not obligated to give a good review after not receiving support.
I have no problem with his actions, (if he doesn’t have the resources/energy/time to support on all platforms, who can complain about that?), but I don’t think he’s very good at the whole communicating with other humans part of software that sadly in the OSS world tends to fall on the same devs that do the work, he could have avoided both this comment thread and the angry android user above with zero extra effort by simply phrasing things better.
The particular poor phrasing he chose seems to imply to me that he’s lumping all users of each platform together in his head, and each negative interaction builds on the previous, which isn’t the healthiest attitude, and does indeed make him look like an arsehole to anyone who’s just turned up and hasn’t yet done anything wrong.
-
You're right, the license is Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (weird choice for a code license, but OK)
CC4.0 licenses work for code. The language was made generic and no longer talks about performing music on stage and such.
Better to use CC NC for non commercial works than to homebrew your own text. CC BY and CC BY SA are GPLv3 compatible.
-
It's probably not, unless all contributors agreed to the license change.
AFAIK they did.
-
That's actually the version that's in the AUR, since they can't put newer (fixed) code in there from the new versions.
AUR can. It’s just locally checking out the code from git and compiling it locally as well. I’m not a pro AUR maintainer but I’m not aware of a single AUR entry that ships software source code directly from AUR.
-
Copyright is always about distribution. So yes, you are allowed to fork, but you are not allowed to distribute the copyrighted content to other people. And with the No Derivatives clause you are also not allowed to change it.
You might be able to stay in the gray are by telling everyone "build it yourself", but nobody would be allowed to package it either.To write a script that checks out upstream code and compiles it locally is not a distribution by a 3rd party. The code comes directly from Stenzek. That’s why he puts the Arch check there.
If that script happens to do a search and replace of archlinux with some random jibberish (so the check is no longer for archlinux), that’s still not a distribution of modified code because all code modifications happen locally.
-
While I understand and respect his feeling, in my limited experience, people that don't like when distributions package their software are often deranged.
Still, if you are using OS packages, your first stop should be OS fora / bug trackers, not upstream. Whoever is producing the distro/OS packages should engage with upstream if and when that's necessary. Upstream, especially small upstreams, really shouldn't be expected to deal with the craziness of Nix, Arch, Debian, and SteamOS all at the same time.
Users are, IME, mostly annoying. Sometimes (not often) I'm glad none of my software has any. At least at work I can point at the Teams / Slack / Jira conversation to prove they specifically asked for something completely different last week and I implemented that.
Normal people would just invite distribution packagers to develop fixes upstream.
-
Sounds like hes just tired of dealing with idiots.
Which I can sympathise with.
Who forces him to respond to such messages on Discord? He can just not engage with people of whom he thinks are idiots.
If he doesn’t want to engage with users at all, maybe not set up a Discord in the first place.
-
You are the only one here carrying on a grudge and being vocal about it.
Are you a big fan of FOSS? How much are you going to support FOSS developers today hmmm?
No. Every time FOSS comes up on Lemmy, FOSS adherents remind me why I'd never dip my toe in that mess.
I use some open source, but I also pay to support it, so I'm not true FOSS. See: Home Assistant. I contribute to the support at times, and I'm familiar with the frustrations - and the need to be consistently cordial. And thick skinned.
For all you know you're talking to someone on the spectrum. Perspective matters.
