Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users.

drmoose@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• elucubra@sopuli.xyz ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  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.

  source

  • drmoose@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yeah but you also don’t get to be upset if someone calls you unpleasant. Both things can be true.

    source

    • agelord@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      He’s upset because people are bothering him for packages that are out of his control. A similar thing happened recently with OBS where a distro was packaging it in a non-standard way, iirc.

      source

      • dustyData@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        They’re not being bothered. They are a sensible asshole. Nothing wrong with that, and they are free to express their truth of how they feel. But there’s no evidence of harassment, if they think bug reports and feature requests is abuse then they are in for a rude experience if someone is stupid enough to actually harass them.

        They should just take their project proprietary anyways. The license used is a joke. Duckstation is not open source, the license is so restrictive that it is barely source available. They are not ideologically, or in practice, part of the FOSS community. So they’re free to take their toy home with them. They weren’t playing nice with others anyway.

        source
      • kadup@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        If you don’t want to see your software packaged in ways outside of your control, is it smart to publish it with a license that allows it to be packaged in ways outside of your control?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • drmoose@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Nah man I maintain a few decently sized packages on github and refusing support etc is perfectly normal but generally you don’t go on this toxic rant and just say “nah man I can’t afford to maintain this” which is very well accepted.

        source
• A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  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 tied, 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.

  source

  • bss03@infosec.pub ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    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.

    source

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Normal people would just invite distribution packagers to develop fixes upstream.

      source