Comment on Lemmy's Image Problem
masterspace@lemmy.ca 3 months agoWe’re not talking about a user demanding you release a flatpak build targeting their personal linux distribution, we’re talking about an app that doesn’t include functionality for a user deleting something they uploaded.
You know what the acronym used for describing the most basic possible web app api is?
CRUD - Create, Read, Update, Delete
we’re talking about a consumer facing social app
What we’re talking about is a complete free and open source project that’s built and maintained completely through volunteer labour.
There are zero obligations towards the people actively using the software.
While I agree that the functionality should exist, the devs can literally do whatever they want. Nobody is paying them.
There are zero obligations towards the people actively using the software.
Yes, there are, and that obligation is to not publish something as production ready if it is illegal to use because of how it’s built.
Yes, there are, and that obligation is to not publish something as production ready if it is illegal to use because of how it’s built.
No, there really isn’t. Do I feel that project owners should follow good practices for maintaining clean code that also allows users to keep things legal? Absolutely I do.
But that is not the same thing as an obligation. If there was a single cent exchanged between the devs and anyone else (donations do not count) then this conversation would be entirely different.
I don’t agree with the devs’ stance. But it is 100% their prerogative to say no. It’s their project, not ours.
I’m a software developer, I understand exactly how frustrating user demands are
As am I.
that was still a completely and utterly unacceptable way to respond to a very politely worded request
I agree.
As the commenter pointed out, if you don’t want to fix it, fine, but then you absolutely have a moral, ethical, and professional obligation to document that clearly in your README.md.
No, you absolutely do not. Although I do somewhat agree on the professional part, but it’s still not an obligation. It’s completely unprofessional, but that’s different than it being an obligation.
The word obligation is not as narrow as you’re using it:
obligation /ŏb″lĭ-gā′shən/
noun A social, legal, or moral requirement, such as a duty, contract, or promise, that compels one to follow or avoid a particular course of action. “Are you able to meet your obligations?” “I have an obligation to attend their wedding.”
Does he have a contractual obligation? No, no contracts were signed. Does he have a legal obligation? No, the license file in the project absolves him of legal liability.
But he absolutely has a moral, social, and professional obligation to do so.
pop@lemmy.ml 3 months ago
You seem to know what you are talking about. Have you made a pull request yet?
masterspace@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
Have you learned how to program to fix the problem rather than making inane and irrelevant comments?
CeeBee@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Ya, this is exactly the attitude that burns out devs and kills projects. Congrats for being super entitled towards a free project.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
It is not entitled to expect a published project to comply with basic privacy legislation and not be illegal to use.
If your bar for this project is that much below basic consumer expectations, then this project was always going to fail.
Maalus@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Is it entitlement if it’s making using the entire thing illegal everywhere? Since there is no tooling to block traffic from the EU / not federate with instances that don’t comply with GDPR?