4 ms·

A bug that results in data loss is not “slight” or “small”. I’d honestly rather have an unstable beta app than a production release that doesn’t offer a proper

A bug that results in data loss is not “slight” or “small”. I’d honestly rather have an unstable beta app than a production release that doesn’t offer a proper data migration. I’m disappointed that the VLC team would rather remove their app from an app store (again) than fix an issue with their app. At least Google is trying to look out for their users.

flyingcircus3 8y ago
Troll me once shame on you, troll me twice shame on me. What if the older, available version, which he just claimed had 2000 bugs, had 2000 bugs that resulted in data loss? How can you legitimately argue that he's not looking out for his users?
godzillabrennus 8y ago
Hard to shame the developers who donate their time to open source software. How about we shake the App Store for trying to decide that 2,000 bugs are better for their users than losing a playlist.
lowtolerance 8y ago
If that were the case and the developers knew it, then they should have pulled it from the store long before now. Think about it - they didn’t pull the app because of the bugs. They pulled the app because they don’t agree with Amazon (of all people) that releasing a major version update with a bug known to cause personal data loss is totally unacceptable. They’d rather not provide an app for the platform at all than work out a solution to a “slight bug” that would cause their users on that platform from losing their playlists during an update. It seems to me that this is a case of a diva developer getting his feelings hurt, not a reasonable decision based on an unconsistent approval process. I can’t imagine a more used-hostile attitude than that. Edit: somehow got it in my head that they pulled VLC from the Google Play Store.
- flyingcircus3 8y ago
  To me it sounds like you've essentialized the target of your ire, while contextualizing what you prefer. Even google shouldnt be above your reproach in a situation like this. VLC is one of the shining beacons of the open source community, in my opinion. Just like every successful project that retains it's core values, compromise is key. The dude is all over this thread calmly explaining everything to anyone who asked. How does any of his behavior fit into any reasonable definition of diva?
  - lowtolerance 8y ago
    Above reproach? For what? Enforcing their quality standards? You are placing the “shining beacon of the open source community” above approach reproach, without a hint of awareness of the irony. Having a calm demeanor when explaining that they pulled the plug on VLC for FireTV because they couldn’t be bothered with fixing a “slight bug” that causes data loss (and which Amazon views as a “blocker”) doesn’t make the decision any less diva-like. Unless a core value of VLC’s dev team is “egos over users”, I don’t see how you could possibly argue that this is a compromise. A compromise would have been leaving the old, buggy version of the app up with a note in the description that it is no longer supported. I find it really disheartening that this is even a contentious opinion in the HN community. If the developer had come right out and said, “we just don’t have the resources to dedicate to fixing a major issue with the way playlists are exported from the current version of our app for FireTV, so we are discontinuing the app, effective immediately”, that would have been perfectly acceptable. Instead, he diminished the severity of the bug and blamed the removal of the app on Amazon’s uneven approval process, despite the fact that the app does not meet one of the most basic criterion of Amazon’s approval process: “Apps do not put customer data at risk once installed”. It’s the developer equivalent of knocking the Monopoly board off the table because you lost a turn. I don’t care how highly regarded the VLC development team is, this kind of behavior should be scorned rather than excused.
    - flyingcircus3 8y ago
      As your fellow developer, if perhaps at a different level of the stack, I've found that when my runtime performs in ways I didn't expect it too, the eventual solution almost always involves me questioning my own assumptions. The microcontroller didnt get statically discharged, my power rail is pulled to ground with an incorrect resistor. I didn't discover a compiler bug, I put a semicolon after my while statement, but before the curly brace. I've also found that my ability to acknowledge this fact is linearly proportional to the time it takes to solve the bug. My point is that the maintainers of VLC sit atop a mountain of software, used by tons of people with oodles of different use cases. The only methodology that ever allowed them to grow to their current stature has been to do whats right by the project. At some point, the large behemoths of Amazon, Google, et al, have to make compromises as well. If they hire enough support staff to have a personal relationship with every client, at the level of service you get from your local credit union, that becomes prohibitively expensive. In lieu of providing good service, they've settled for efficient service. VLC is Kobe Beef. If Amazon wants to carry Kobe Beef, perhaps they should provide the level of service that Kobe Beef consumers demand. Lots of other folks love to advertise Kobe Beef, but balk at all of the transparency that an authentic Kobe Beef retailer has. Amazon loves to throw its weight around, and claim its for the greater good. But to the extent they can't get what they want, they pull their top selling products from their shelves. They've even done this with books, the one of the markets they dominate to the highest degree. But if we all demand that we be recognized as the one true expert in our fields, compromise becomes a four letter word.

flyingcircus3 8y ago

Troll me once shame on you, troll me twice shame on me. What if the older, available version, which he just claimed had 2000 bugs, had 2000 bugs that resulted in data loss? How can you legitimately argue that he's not looking out for his users?

godzillabrennus 8y ago

Hard to shame the developers who donate their time to open source software. How about we shake the App Store for trying to decide that 2,000 bugs are better for their users than losing a playlist.

lowtolerance 8y ago

If that were the case and the developers knew it, then they should have pulled it from the store long before now. Think about it - they didn’t pull the app because of the bugs. They pulled the app because they don’t agree with Amazon (of all people) that releasing a major version update with a bug known to cause personal data loss is totally unacceptable. They’d rather not provide an app for the platform at all than work out a solution to a “slight bug” that would cause their users on that platform from losing their playlists during an update. It seems to me that this is a case of a diva developer getting his feelings hurt, not a reasonable decision based on an unconsistent approval process. I can’t imagine a more used-hostile attitude than that. Edit: somehow got it in my head that they pulled VLC from the Google Play Store.

flyingcircus3 8y ago
To me it sounds like you've essentialized the target of your ire, while contextualizing what you prefer. Even google shouldnt be above your reproach in a situation like this. VLC is one of the shining beacons of the open source community, in my opinion. Just like every successful project that retains it's core values, compromise is key. The dude is all over this thread calmly explaining everything to anyone who asked. How does any of his behavior fit into any reasonable definition of diva?
- lowtolerance 8y ago
  Above reproach? For what? Enforcing their quality standards? You are placing the “shining beacon of the open source community” above approach reproach, without a hint of awareness of the irony. Having a calm demeanor when explaining that they pulled the plug on VLC for FireTV because they couldn’t be bothered with fixing a “slight bug” that causes data loss (and which Amazon views as a “blocker”) doesn’t make the decision any less diva-like. Unless a core value of VLC’s dev team is “egos over users”, I don’t see how you could possibly argue that this is a compromise. A compromise would have been leaving the old, buggy version of the app up with a note in the description that it is no longer supported. I find it really disheartening that this is even a contentious opinion in the HN community. If the developer had come right out and said, “we just don’t have the resources to dedicate to fixing a major issue with the way playlists are exported from the current version of our app for FireTV, so we are discontinuing the app, effective immediately”, that would have been perfectly acceptable. Instead, he diminished the severity of the bug and blamed the removal of the app on Amazon’s uneven approval process, despite the fact that the app does not meet one of the most basic criterion of Amazon’s approval process: “Apps do not put customer data at risk once installed”. It’s the developer equivalent of knocking the Monopoly board off the table because you lost a turn. I don’t care how highly regarded the VLC development team is, this kind of behavior should be scorned rather than excused.
  - flyingcircus3 8y ago
    As your fellow developer, if perhaps at a different level of the stack, I've found that when my runtime performs in ways I didn't expect it too, the eventual solution almost always involves me questioning my own assumptions. The microcontroller didnt get statically discharged, my power rail is pulled to ground with an incorrect resistor. I didn't discover a compiler bug, I put a semicolon after my while statement, but before the curly brace. I've also found that my ability to acknowledge this fact is linearly proportional to the time it takes to solve the bug. My point is that the maintainers of VLC sit atop a mountain of software, used by tons of people with oodles of different use cases. The only methodology that ever allowed them to grow to their current stature has been to do whats right by the project. At some point, the large behemoths of Amazon, Google, et al, have to make compromises as well. If they hire enough support staff to have a personal relationship with every client, at the level of service you get from your local credit union, that becomes prohibitively expensive. In lieu of providing good service, they've settled for efficient service. VLC is Kobe Beef. If Amazon wants to carry Kobe Beef, perhaps they should provide the level of service that Kobe Beef consumers demand. Lots of other folks love to advertise Kobe Beef, but balk at all of the transparency that an authentic Kobe Beef retailer has. Amazon loves to throw its weight around, and claim its for the greater good. But to the extent they can't get what they want, they pull their top selling products from their shelves. They've even done this with books, the one of the markets they dominate to the highest degree. But if we all demand that we be recognized as the one true expert in our fields, compromise becomes a four letter word.