Not really sure how you read my comment as "shitting" on anyone. I'm just commenting that it's unexpected and unusual for a FOSS dev to not be Linux user. Idc what they do, just making the observation as someone involved in the FOSS space that most of my peers are more likely to shit on windows than Linux.
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 you 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.
socsa@piefed.social 4 days ago
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 days ago
you didn’t make an observation. you made a statement. you stated that it’s impossible to fathom why anyone doing foss would continue using Windows over Linux.
it’s not impossible, you just choose to disregard their personal preferences.
tabular@lemmy.world 4 days ago
“It’s impossible” is often used not to literally describe a logically impossible event but instead as an exaggeration. “I can’t possibly fathom why” is also not literal, it means under regular circumstances.
I cannot imagine why anyone would prefer grass that cuts your skin over regular grassmeans for typical people using grass in typical garden/field situations. That could be someone’s person preference but that it’s not typical, it’s unexpected.
zonnewin@feddit.nl 4 days ago
Just open source it and leave it to the Linux community.
I understand not wanting to support something you don’t use yourself.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 4 days ago
He chooses to do direct support over discord vs making people make github issues and wants to whine that this is taxing
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 4 days ago
The original code was GPL which he illegally re-licensed to creative commons.
deaddigger@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
If you are the copyright owner you can relicense any way you want learn some copyright law.
cole@lemdro.id 4 days ago
right but unless you sign a contributor licensing agreement when you contribute then the copyright owner can’t relicense code you contributed.
so if you contribute to a GPL codebase it’s pretty legally perilous to try to unilaterally relicense code that isn’t “yours”.
this is pretty nebulous territory anyways, but I’d argue it’s pretty unethical to relicense to a more restrictive license essentially “taking” the GPL code from contributors
AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
This is true, but it’s also true that the older gpl versions can’t be revoked.
deaddigger@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Well yes and no you can release them going forward under a new licence. If you obtained your copy under the old license you can use it under the old license when you obtain a new copy you have a new license agreement. Thats absolutly possible to do Revoking licenses is alot harder though and changing the lizens from a foss on to another is often confusing and business inapropiate. However it is legal.
9bananas@feddit.org 4 days ago
yes you can!
…for new versions. not for already released ones.
at least not with most common copyleft/open source licenses.
VonReposti@feddit.dk 4 days ago
Only if you are the sole contributor or get a written consent from all contributors. GPL doesn’t hand over the copyright to the maintainer.
deaddigger@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Well yes and no you can release them going forward under a new licence. If you obtained your copy under the old license you can use it under the old license when you obtain a new copy you have a new license agreement. Thats absolutly possible to do. Revoking licenses is alot harder though and changing the lizens from a foss on to another is often confusing and business inapropiate. However it is legal.
JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world 3 days ago
You’ll find the copyright owner is Sony.
deaddigger@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
So the original code wasnt gpl at all then
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 days ago
fair enough, but that doesn’t mean he has to do everything anyone asks him. he’s still within his rights to close the source down and obliterate it from the internet. others will come and pick up the torch.
null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 4 days ago
And likewise, that doesn’t mean people aren’t allowed to give him shit for doing it.