4 ms·

> "we the users" could mandate Yuck. As I said: > Instead, it is always someone else's problem. "I am the customer mentality" has been with FOSS and Linux f

> "we the users" could mandate Yuck. As I said: > Instead, it is always someone else's problem. "I am the customer mentality" has been with FOSS and Linux for awhile, but one wishes people might shake themselves out of their stupor for 2 seconds to realize: "You're getting all this stuff for free." Instead, every user wants to man the battlements on Reddit and tell devs how to do the thing. Re: the parent, she/he shouldn't be downvoted for making an unpopular yet interesting point.

Brian_K_White 4y ago
Yet somehow as a developer I have no problem at all realising that it is user-hostile to take liberties with their system. It's violating trust and I have no need to do it in order to provide, even to install, a piece of software.
- mustache_kimono 4y ago
  > It's violating trust `curl | bash` is pretty upfront about what it is. It would seem the user is the one taking liberties, but perhaps I'm missing your point?
denton-scratch 4y ago
> "You're getting all this stuff for free." Of course. Part of packaging something, and then releasing it through a distro's package manager, is that it goes through the distro's release process; someone reviews it. It becomes part of the distro. In particular, if it goes into something like Debian's "main" repository, I'm inclined to trust it almost as much as I trust the core OS release. I'm not going to man battlements anywhere over this kind of thing; but I'm not going to execute arbitrary shell scripts downloaded from the internet without reviewing them; and 600 lines of shell-script is more than I want to review, unless I'm super-motivated. If the only way of installing a package is Docker (which I don't care for) or wildcat script, and that package has no maintainer for my chosen distro; that's fine, and I'm not going to beat up the developer. It's not his fault, nor his responsibility. So instead I generally look for an alternative package that's shipped by my distro. I don't keep a record of all the wildcat software installed on my systems, because there usually isn't any, and my package manager knows exactly what's installed.
- mustache_kimono 4y ago
  > I'm not going to man battlements anywhere over this kind of thing Totally agree. A preference is fine. A demand that devs do something different with their limited time and resources is nonsense. Making the choice not to package and distribute is fine. Then -- it just becomes someone else's problem. You hate omz's update method? Then be prepared to package it yourself. That's all I'm saying.

Brian_K_White 4y ago

Yet somehow as a developer I have no problem at all realising that it is user-hostile to take liberties with their system. It's violating trust and I have no need to do it in order to provide, even to install, a piece of software.

mustache_kimono 4y ago
> It's violating trust `curl | bash` is pretty upfront about what it is. It would seem the user is the one taking liberties, but perhaps I'm missing your point?

denton-scratch 4y ago

> "You're getting all this stuff for free." Of course. Part of packaging something, and then releasing it through a distro's package manager, is that it goes through the distro's release process; someone reviews it. It becomes part of the distro. In particular, if it goes into something like Debian's "main" repository, I'm inclined to trust it almost as much as I trust the core OS release. I'm not going to man battlements anywhere over this kind of thing; but I'm not going to execute arbitrary shell scripts downloaded from the internet without reviewing them; and 600 lines of shell-script is more than I want to review, unless I'm super-motivated. If the only way of installing a package is Docker (which I don't care for) or wildcat script, and that package has no maintainer for my chosen distro; that's fine, and I'm not going to beat up the developer. It's not his fault, nor his responsibility. So instead I generally look for an alternative package that's shipped by my distro. I don't keep a record of all the wildcat software installed on my systems, because there usually isn't any, and my package manager knows exactly what's installed.

mustache_kimono 4y ago
> I'm not going to man battlements anywhere over this kind of thing Totally agree. A preference is fine. A demand that devs do something different with their limited time and resources is nonsense. Making the choice not to package and distribute is fine. Then -- it just becomes someone else's problem. You hate omz's update method? Then be prepared to package it yourself. That's all I'm saying.