3 ms·

Lets check. I tolerate both versions, use workarounds in my .bash_profile and share them, actually tried to patch and have written article [0]. You shame softw

Lets check. I tolerate both versions, use workarounds in my .bash_profile and share them, actually tried to patch and have written article [0]. You shame software, half of it has workaround, see patching as impractical. XDG Base Directory Specification [1] is not about your home folder. It is about default storage, separation of cache, user data and config, a way to provide another config, so one can: * remove entire config when stuck with a problem * remove cache, think /var/cache * `ssh -F foo` would be `XDG_CONFIG_HOME=foo ssh` Everyone has a pain point, everyone has a workflow, there is no One True Way. Please stop shaming authors, they quit, sometimes post it here about mob. Patching folder structure is the simplest thing. If you can't do that who is going to fix actual bugs? [0] http://sergeykish.com/openssh-config-in-xdg-directory http://sergeykish.com/openssh-config-in-xdg-directory [1] https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-...

Avamander 6y ago
> Please stop shaming authors, they quit, sometimes post it here about mob. If one feels that talking about a bug in their software is "shaming" them, then maybe they should quit or alternatively, just quit pretending they want feedback or to write FOSS. Same applies to teams writing software. Not to mention how harmful it is to think that everyone who picks up FOSS is actually good at it. Thinking people as infallible is actively harmful for the end users. > Patching folder structure is the simplest thing. If you can't do that who is going to fix actual bugs? Incorrect folder structure is an actual bug. It might be simple to patch for the end user, but you're ignoring the maintenance burden, annoyance and cumbersomeness. > Everyone has a pain point, everyone has a workflow, there is no One True Way. There are paths more correct than others, some workflows are obsolete and stupid, and should't be catered to. It's wilful ignorance to ignore that. https://xkcd.com/1172/ https://xkcd.com/1172/ > half of it has workaround Bwahahaha, you may think that's fine, but I don't.
- sergeykish 6y ago
  Your words > Name and shame > they should quit That's why I've called it harmful - choice between your complains and people writing code is obvious. Fork it, patch it, there is no burden - if people care maintainers would switch, if switched enough patch would get in upstream. Or provide own repository with patches, that's FOSS way. If not by yourself than sponsor. How much do you actually care? How much would you pay? Is it free as speech or free as beer?
  - Avamander 6y ago
    > Your words Without the rest of the context and no, criticism is not harmful. If it is a "sin" like you say, should we look at things you've said about FOSS projects? > Fork it, patch it, there is no burden Either you're delusional or you haven't done either of the things. > if people care maintainers would switch, if switched enough patch would get in upstream or provide own repository with patches, that's FOSS way. Yeah, and it'll take the next decade, being optimistic. GPU acceleration in Chromium and Firefox on Linux is a perfect example how absolute shit that "way" is. > How much do you actually care? How much would you pay? Is it free as speech or free as beer? Feel free (as in freedom) to just type out your arguments instead of asking rhetorical questions.
    - sergeykish 6y ago
      So the answer is no, you will not pay. Question was not rhetorical - it is realization of freedom 1. You answer implies there is a fork with GPU acceleration and no one cares (or does not answer my post). Ah, "criticism is not harmful": Name and same: * Avamander
      - Avamander 6y ago
        > So the answer is no, you will not pay. No, I won't pay to devs that ignore conventions. That's like having someone take a s* on my porch and me paying them for not doing so. Plus, demanding payment is the thing not really in the spirit for FOSS. > Ah, "criticism is not harmful": That's just naming, without listing the reason. In addition to that, I listed projects, not people. Shows that you've totally missed the point of the original list.

Avamander 6y ago

> Please stop shaming authors, they quit, sometimes post it here about mob. If one feels that talking about a bug in their software is "shaming" them, then maybe they should quit or alternatively, just quit pretending they want feedback or to write FOSS. Same applies to teams writing software. Not to mention how harmful it is to think that everyone who picks up FOSS is actually good at it. Thinking people as infallible is actively harmful for the end users. > Patching folder structure is the simplest thing. If you can't do that who is going to fix actual bugs? Incorrect folder structure is an actual bug. It might be simple to patch for the end user, but you're ignoring the maintenance burden, annoyance and cumbersomeness. > Everyone has a pain point, everyone has a workflow, there is no One True Way. There are paths more correct than others, some workflows are obsolete and stupid, and should't be catered to. It's wilful ignorance to ignore that. https://xkcd.com/1172/ https://xkcd.com/1172/ > half of it has workaround Bwahahaha, you may think that's fine, but I don't.

sergeykish 6y ago
Your words > Name and shame > they should quit That's why I've called it harmful - choice between your complains and people writing code is obvious. Fork it, patch it, there is no burden - if people care maintainers would switch, if switched enough patch would get in upstream. Or provide own repository with patches, that's FOSS way. If not by yourself than sponsor. How much do you actually care? How much would you pay? Is it free as speech or free as beer?
- Avamander 6y ago
  > Your words Without the rest of the context and no, criticism is not harmful. If it is a "sin" like you say, should we look at things you've said about FOSS projects? > Fork it, patch it, there is no burden Either you're delusional or you haven't done either of the things. > if people care maintainers would switch, if switched enough patch would get in upstream or provide own repository with patches, that's FOSS way. Yeah, and it'll take the next decade, being optimistic. GPU acceleration in Chromium and Firefox on Linux is a perfect example how absolute shit that "way" is. > How much do you actually care? How much would you pay? Is it free as speech or free as beer? Feel free (as in freedom) to just type out your arguments instead of asking rhetorical questions.
  - sergeykish 6y ago
    So the answer is no, you will not pay. Question was not rhetorical - it is realization of freedom 1. You answer implies there is a fork with GPU acceleration and no one cares (or does not answer my post). Ah, "criticism is not harmful": Name and same: * Avamander
    - Avamander 6y ago
      > So the answer is no, you will not pay. No, I won't pay to devs that ignore conventions. That's like having someone take a s* on my porch and me paying them for not doing so. Plus, demanding payment is the thing not really in the spirit for FOSS. > Ah, "criticism is not harmful": That's just naming, without listing the reason. In addition to that, I listed projects, not people. Shows that you've totally missed the point of the original list.