2 ms·

This has got to be the single most ridiculous comparison I've ever seen on this website.

• dotancohen 6y ago
  I'd love to know why. Mozilla has made a change that has no other effect than excluding 0.1% of their userbase. No end users were benefited by the removal of ALSA support, but "only" 0.1% were excluded. I've put 0.1% into perspective.
  • dralley 6y ago
    >No end users were benefited by the removal of ALSA support Don't be dishonest. Maintaining things requires time and effort. Time and effort are limited resources. * Nobody was maintaining ALSA support * Nobody from the community stepped up and offered to maintain ALSA support to prevent it from being removed * The ALSA backend poked a massive hole in their sandbox, which hurts users. Rewriting the ALSA backend to make it compatible with sandboxing would have required a lot of time and effort for little payoff. That hurts users by wasting developer time that could have been spent more productively. * You cannot compare a Free Software project removing support for something that nobody volunteered to maintain to anti-semitic persecution, don't be ridiculous. If Gentoo (or whoever) wants to keep ALSA support then they can carry the patch to do so.
    • dotancohen 6y ago
      > Maintaining things requires time and effort. Time and > effort are limited resources. Airlines' provisions of Kosher meals also require time and effort. The meals must be prepared and packaged and handled in a parallel effort to the regular meals, not to mention that they must be counted and accounted for. Yet, those 0.1% of the flying public which require Kosher meals are deemed worthy enough to continue providing support for them.