3 ms·

> It's a manifestation of developer arrogance to not even give the end user the option. Calibre is a free, open source software. If it doesn’t fit your flow -

by allarm 3y ago

> It's a manifestation of developer arrogance to not even give the end user the option. Calibre is a free, open source software. If it doesn’t fit your flow - don’t use it. The author doesn’t owe you anything. You should be thanking him for his great job that he does for free, instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally.

OfSanguineFire 3y ago
> instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime Goyal has stated that he would not merge the feature even if other people did the work.
kyorochan 3y ago
> you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally. They never said this, only that developing a product to be used by a lot of people and completely disregarding a (arguably very common) use case is arrogant.
- knewter 3y ago
  This isn't what arrogance is though.
sfRattan 3y ago
> ...instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally. Please don't put words in my mouth. It's insulting, rude, and also arrogant. Nowhere have I suggested that I am entitled to anything. Nowhere have I requested multiple features. You're writing as if I'm in this developer's issue tracker making demands. I'm not. We're both in a thread on a forum separate from Calibre's development and maintenance where the topic of discussion is Calibre's strengths and shortcomings. I did imply that not providing an off-switch for tangential complexity in software is an arrogant design decision. I stand by that opinion.
- allarm 3y ago
  > Please don't put words in my mouth. It's insulting, rude, and also arrogant. :) so you’re complaining that the existing feature set doesn’t cover your use case, calling this decision arrogant, but _in fact_ you do not want this feature implemented? Right. Now I follow. Of course you didn’t say that. My apologies. > You're writing as if I'm in this developer's issue tracker making demands. I'm not. We're both in a thread on a forum separate from… Calling people arrogant for the choices they made working on a product (useful to thousands) for free is exactly what entitlement is. It would be actually better if you did the same in the issue tracker, at least the author could have blocked you and limit the toxicity. It’s not up to you to decide for the author of the free tool what features should be implemented in this tool. You didn’t pay a cent to him. You do not have any right to criticize him in this tone. What you could do is ask politely and leave quietly if the request was denied. Or you could suggest better alternatives as the author of the linked article did. Everything else is nothing but entitlement. And yeah, I stand by that opinion too.

by allarm 3y ago

OfSanguineFire 3y ago

> instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime Goyal has stated that he would not merge the feature even if other people did the work.

kyorochan 3y ago

> you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally. They never said this, only that developing a product to be used by a lot of people and completely disregarding a (arguably very common) use case is arrogant.

knewter 3y ago
This isn't what arrogance is though.

sfRattan 3y ago

> ...instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally. Please don't put words in my mouth. It's insulting, rude, and also arrogant. Nowhere have I suggested that I am entitled to anything. Nowhere have I requested multiple features. You're writing as if I'm in this developer's issue tracker making demands. I'm not. We're both in a thread on a forum separate from Calibre's development and maintenance where the topic of discussion is Calibre's strengths and shortcomings. I did imply that not providing an off-switch for tangential complexity in software is an arrogant design decision. I stand by that opinion.

allarm 3y ago
> Please don't put words in my mouth. It's insulting, rude, and also arrogant. :) so you’re complaining that the existing feature set doesn’t cover your use case, calling this decision arrogant, but _in fact_ you do not want this feature implemented? Right. Now I follow. Of course you didn’t say that. My apologies. > You're writing as if I'm in this developer's issue tracker making demands. I'm not. We're both in a thread on a forum separate from… Calling people arrogant for the choices they made working on a product (useful to thousands) for free is exactly what entitlement is. It would be actually better if you did the same in the issue tracker, at least the author could have blocked you and limit the toxicity. It’s not up to you to decide for the author of the free tool what features should be implemented in this tool. You didn’t pay a cent to him. You do not have any right to criticize him in this tone. What you could do is ask politely and leave quietly if the request was denied. Or you could suggest better alternatives as the author of the linked article did. Everything else is nothing but entitlement. And yeah, I stand by that opinion too.