Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
18 comments
Tor Lillqvist

@isotopp Not just corporations. Lots of fervent individual supporters of Open Source think that by using the software, they are entitled to speedy support and fixes for their pet bugs.

DELETED

@tml @isotopp This reminds me I need to be more proactive in my bug reporting and fixing as an individual user.

I just use, rarely report bugs or improvements. And if I do, I want it fixed quick by the maintainer.

I do have programming experience and knowledge. So I should help more, maybe fix it myself and thus be more 'proactive'.

DELETED

@tml @isotopp Open source is give and take.

I just take, rarely give.

I should start doing that more.

Heliograph

@isotopp oh lordy ain't that the truth 😬

dch :flantifa: :flan_hacker:

@isotopp Entitled User Syndrome “I have many paying customers who are very angry that you have not fixed this yet during your holiday”

Freevolt

@isotopp It's a bit of the same from security academia, sadly. Finds a bunch of issues, gets popular, doesn't care about the aftermath.

Pit

@isotopp I think that as a community we should be more open to licenses that are a lot more restrictive when it comes to use by corporations. Software freedom isn't freedom if we are exploited by corps. Recently I discovered the anticapitalist license which I'm tempted to start using on certain projects: anticapitalist.software/

Kris

@piturnah Usually AGPL 3 is good enough to make any corp not use the code.

"A"GPL so they can't host for third parties.
"GPL3" with the software patent clause, so that they lose the right to run any GPL3 if they sue over software patents.

Pit

@isotopp I understand this for things like packages, but what about tooling/applications/whatever? As I understand corporations can still rely on this kind of software published under GPL because they aren't modifying and/or redistributing it / distributing software that relies on it directly in the stack
Please let me know if I'm missing something here or being naive.

Alper Çuğun-Gscheidel

@isotopp Maybe don't start the umpteenth Typescript ORM library just because the biggest one "didn't sit right with you".

ssh://thepinkhacker.com

@isotopp Ok so as someone with multiple open-source projects, I have some thoughts on this.
While people shouldn't be entitled to their issue tickets, having them at all is very valuable. So few people actually report bugs for my projects. I end up being the one to discover more than 90% of them. But when someone does report a bug, I often had no clue it existed and am able to fix it.
Just because I get a issue ticket doesn't mean it's a walk in the park to fix. But, overall they do help.

JP Stringham

@ThePinkHacker @isotopp I agree, the free layer of QA with issue submission is totally accceptable for me. Doesn’t mean I can get to it quickly but I am happy to have someone else formalize bug reports!

DELETED

@isotopp

If there's any one part of OSS documentation that needs to be religiously updated, it's the build instructions. Otherwise would-be contributors will try to do their part, discover they can't even compile, and just go elsewhere

Oven🧪

@nbaileydev @isotopp Totally agree, undervalued feature of OSS repos is easy onboarding and clear documentation.

Go Up