5 ms·

I don’t understand. It’s your project, you do what you want and nothing more.

by groundzeros2015 11mo ago

boyter 11mo ago
People who give away things like this tend to be good people. As such when someone comes asking for help or new things they are inclined to help. Your response is where it should go when things get rude, but you don't want to start there.
- groundzeros2015 11mo ago
  I have projects online. You can use them, or not. Sometimes people file issues that I think are good and fix them.
mickael-kerjean 11mo ago
Yesterday I received this message from a random github user: "Seriously. No SSO at all in free version? This is poor. Very very greedy and poor" [1] If you do not spend a lot of time explaining things at length, people will link back to how much an asshole you are. [1]: https://github.com/mickael-kerjean/filestash/issues/661#issuecomment-3570368093 https://github.com/mickael-kerjean/filestash/issues/661#issu...
- Sleaker 11mo ago
  LOL all that user does is open issues for free support?
- timcobb 11mo ago
  Ew gross
- venturecruelty 11mo ago
  In the words of Lizzo: "Let 'em say what they gonna say. They gonna feel how they gonna feel." Back in the day, we called this "feeding the trolls", and the advice hasn't changed: ignore them. You don't owe every single person online any part of your short, precious life. Issues have delete buttons (and there are other hosted SCMs besides GitHub). I encourage liberal use thereof.
- ohyoutravel 11mo ago
  I would pull my hair out.
- groundzeros2015 11mo ago
  Close. Report as spam.
- scuff3d 11mo ago
  So what? Fuck 'em. It's your project and it's open source. If they want the feature so bad they can add it themselves.
- LtWorf 11mo ago
  The expired certificate on your own website (linked on your gh profile) doesn't fill me with confidence to hire you as a consultant though. I'd at least make sure the cert is up to date.
- squigz 11mo ago
  Simply ignore users like that. If someone actually important brings up that instance as you 'being an asshole', then explain your reasoning then. If that doesn't calm them down, they're probably not someone worth working with. I'll also point out the supportive comments in that thread; sure there's always gunna be some negativity, but there's also positive people. Focus on those.
- eviks 11mo ago
  You've got the comment after you've explained at length
- icar 11mo ago
  Cool project, gave it a star and bookmarked it.
nickelpro 11mo ago
Ya OP is shadow boxing. There is absolutely no need for any of these things. Tons of open source exists as only source code and a license, nothing else. No docs, no issue tracker, nothing. People who need it use it, learn from it, remix it, whatever, but there need not be any engagement at all from the given repo's maintainer.
- venturecruelty 11mo ago
  Seriously. If I throw something up somewhere, you get a tarball, a README, and no way to get in touch with me. If the code helps you, fantastic! If it doesn't, then I hope you at least got something out of the experience. But "as-is" means what it says on the tin. I'm not sure why people are so hellbent on treating every message from every stranger as important.
  - imiric 11mo ago
    /sigh Because open source is not just about the code and the license. It is first and foremost about a community of people who want to make software better for everyone, not just for themselves or a select few. The code and license are ancillary to this goal. I won't get into this discussion again. I'll just say that if you think otherwise, whatever good you think you're putting out into the world, is not much better than keeping the software proprietary.
    - nickelpro 11mo ago
      You have this entirely backwards. Open source is, definitionally, the code and a license. It is "first and foremost" those things. The community of people cannot exist without the code and the license. The code and the license can and often does exist without dedicated communities. Everything else in open source is a cultural projection entirely ancillary to the code and the license. > I'll just say that if you think otherwise, whatever good you think you're putting out into the world, is not much better than keeping the software proprietary. I have never seen someone so entirely miss the point of open source. This is not a house party, this is not a community support network. There are genuine disagreements about open source philosophy, if it should be more focused on user freedoms or developer convenience, but they are all incompatible with the idea that open-source licensed code in and of itself "is not much better than keeping the software proprietary". Stallman did not invent the GPL because he wanted an issue tracker and complete documentation from HP. He invented the GPL because he needed to fix his printer drivers. A ton of very important open source code was thrust into the world, created immense value, but was never further supported or developed by its original developers. Off the top of my head: git, Doom, Bitcoin, and basically everything Fabrice Bellard has ever done.

I don’t understand. It’s your project, you do what you want and nothing more.

boyter 11mo ago

People who give away things like this tend to be good people. As such when someone comes asking for help or new things they are inclined to help. Your response is where it should go when things get rude, but you don't want to start there.

groundzeros2015 11mo ago
I have projects online. You can use them, or not. Sometimes people file issues that I think are good and fix them.

mickael-kerjean 11mo ago

Yesterday I received this message from a random github user: "Seriously. No SSO at all in free version? This is poor. Very very greedy and poor" [1] If you do not spend a lot of time explaining things at length, people will link back to how much an asshole you are. [1]: https://github.com/mickael-kerjean/filestash/issues/661#issuecomment-3570368093 https://github.com/mickael-kerjean/filestash/issues/661#issu...

Sleaker 11mo ago
LOL all that user does is open issues for free support?
timcobb 11mo ago
Ew gross
venturecruelty 11mo ago
In the words of Lizzo: "Let 'em say what they gonna say. They gonna feel how they gonna feel." Back in the day, we called this "feeding the trolls", and the advice hasn't changed: ignore them. You don't owe every single person online any part of your short, precious life. Issues have delete buttons (and there are other hosted SCMs besides GitHub). I encourage liberal use thereof.
ohyoutravel 11mo ago
I would pull my hair out.
groundzeros2015 11mo ago
Close. Report as spam.
scuff3d 11mo ago
So what? Fuck 'em. It's your project and it's open source. If they want the feature so bad they can add it themselves.
LtWorf 11mo ago
The expired certificate on your own website (linked on your gh profile) doesn't fill me with confidence to hire you as a consultant though. I'd at least make sure the cert is up to date.
squigz 11mo ago
Simply ignore users like that. If someone actually important brings up that instance as you 'being an asshole', then explain your reasoning then. If that doesn't calm them down, they're probably not someone worth working with. I'll also point out the supportive comments in that thread; sure there's always gunna be some negativity, but there's also positive people. Focus on those.
eviks 11mo ago
You've got the comment after you've explained at length
icar 11mo ago
Cool project, gave it a star and bookmarked it.

nickelpro 11mo ago

Ya OP is shadow boxing. There is absolutely no need for any of these things. Tons of open source exists as only source code and a license, nothing else. No docs, no issue tracker, nothing. People who need it use it, learn from it, remix it, whatever, but there need not be any engagement at all from the given repo's maintainer.

venturecruelty 11mo ago
Seriously. If I throw something up somewhere, you get a tarball, a README, and no way to get in touch with me. If the code helps you, fantastic! If it doesn't, then I hope you at least got something out of the experience. But "as-is" means what it says on the tin. I'm not sure why people are so hellbent on treating every message from every stranger as important.
- imiric 11mo ago
  /sigh Because open source is not just about the code and the license. It is first and foremost about a community of people who want to make software better for everyone, not just for themselves or a select few. The code and license are ancillary to this goal. I won't get into this discussion again. I'll just say that if you think otherwise, whatever good you think you're putting out into the world, is not much better than keeping the software proprietary.
  - nickelpro 11mo ago
    You have this entirely backwards. Open source is, definitionally, the code and a license. It is "first and foremost" those things. The community of people cannot exist without the code and the license. The code and the license can and often does exist without dedicated communities. Everything else in open source is a cultural projection entirely ancillary to the code and the license. > I'll just say that if you think otherwise, whatever good you think you're putting out into the world, is not much better than keeping the software proprietary. I have never seen someone so entirely miss the point of open source. This is not a house party, this is not a community support network. There are genuine disagreements about open source philosophy, if it should be more focused on user freedoms or developer convenience, but they are all incompatible with the idea that open-source licensed code in and of itself "is not much better than keeping the software proprietary". Stallman did not invent the GPL because he wanted an issue tracker and complete documentation from HP. He invented the GPL because he needed to fix his printer drivers. A ton of very important open source code was thrust into the world, created immense value, but was never further supported or developed by its original developers. Off the top of my head: git, Doom, Bitcoin, and basically everything Fabrice Bellard has ever done.