I originally provided this an alternative to the broken AUR packages.
However, it seems that Arch users would rather use broken packages and
keep complaining to me instead of their packager. I spe...
The post says AUR builds are being blocked and soon Linux support will be dropped entirely.
Sucks that people are so shitty about problems that crop up in FOSS. Just be nice about things and it wouldn’t be a problem, the developer owes you nothing.
That happens so often with non-corporation FOSS. Some dude makes something cool and shares it for free, and in turn they get a butload of entitled support requests of idiots who think that “customer is king” applies for stuff they didn’t pay for too, and who think that the developer owes them something for using his software.
A similar thing happened with M66B. He got so fed up that he pulled all his apps. Luckily people managed to talk him out of it, but it’s really understandable.
The dev did develop most things himself so they have the copyright and can relicense freely. Also, they’ve asked other major contributors whether they agree with him relicensing their code, which they were seemingly okay with. Small contributions aren’t copyrightable anyway, and/or the dev likely has rewritten them already.
Yes, making a fork from the newest version that allows it would be the way to go. I am quite unfamiliat with PS1 emulation but perhaps there are others anyway?
Open source freedom means that the author can have crazy license, and we can just not use it or look for alternatives
Again, look at how distros handled DeCSS back when that was an issue. There were just “unofficial” 3rd party repos hosted in places that didn’t care about US crypto laws.
Crypto laws aren’t copyright. Protesting an unjust law via civil disobedience is entirely different from hypocritically breaking a law you yourself rely on just because you wanna.
No, that came after he changed the license. Linux users installed an old version because that was the newest version that was allowed to be packaged. Then, people gave bug reports and feature requests, based on that old version (which were already addressed in newer versions), mostly because they didn’t know any better.
It’s not entitlement if you want to use the package manager on a linux system.
Stenzek seems to have a history of being the problem… I don’t know if their words should be taken at face value, or that they’re arguing in good faith at all
Sucks that people are so shitty about problems that crop up in FOSS. Just be nice about things and it wouldn’t be a problem, the developer owes you nothing.
Homie doesnt let you fork the shit to maintain it yourself. He made the problem.
Doesn’t change how people treat developers. I gather this guy isn’t that great, but people should just move elsewhere instead of being hostile.
That happens so often with non-corporation FOSS. Some dude makes something cool and shares it for free, and in turn they get a butload of entitled support requests of idiots who think that “customer is king” applies for stuff they didn’t pay for too, and who think that the developer owes them something for using his software.
A similar thing happened with M66B. He got so fed up that he pulled all his apps. Luckily people managed to talk him out of it, but it’s really understandable.
Then it’s not FOSS.
Just do it anyways, fuck what he wants.
Forking against the license wouldn’t solve the problem of not being included in distributions though. No sane distribution would include the fork.
You could if you want fork from when it was GPLv3: https://github.com/stenzek/duckstation/commit/7f4e5d55dbdef5a50e0aa4994f667fb03d854928
But how did he changed from copyleft licence to stricter? Isn’t it already vialenced copyleft licence?
The dev did develop most things himself so they have the copyright and can relicense freely. Also, they’ve asked other major contributors whether they agree with him relicensing their code, which they were seemingly okay with. Small contributions aren’t copyrightable anyway, and/or the dev likely has rewritten them already.
Yes, making a fork from the newest version that allows it would be the way to go. I am quite unfamiliat with PS1 emulation but perhaps there are others anyway?
Open source freedom means that the author can have crazy license, and we can just not use it or look for alternatives
Again, look at how distros handled DeCSS back when that was an issue. There were just “unofficial” 3rd party repos hosted in places that didn’t care about US crypto laws.
Crypto laws aren’t copyright. Protesting an unjust law via civil disobedience is entirely different from hypocritically breaking a law you yourself rely on just because you wanna.
The dev forbids packaging his emulator via licence. I’m pleading that they’re the asshole here.
Because he kept getting entitled support requests for badly packaged versions of his project in some linux distros.
No, that came after he changed the license. Linux users installed an old version because that was the newest version that was allowed to be packaged. Then, people gave bug reports and feature requests, based on that old version (which were already addressed in newer versions), mostly because they didn’t know any better.
It’s not entitlement if you want to use the package manager on a linux system.
Stenzek seems to have a history of being the problem… I don’t know if their words should be taken at face value, or that they’re arguing in good faith at all