3 ms·

> This is the classic open-source "fuck you with a smile" response. Since open source is free and open, it really can't fuck you †. You can however screw yours

> This is the classic open-source "fuck you with a smile" response. Since open source is free and open, it really can't fuck you †. You can however screw yourself by relying on it to do your work for you. As you say, few people have the skills, time and desire to fix these sorts of problems, and that means you can't rely on open source to fix them for you. Fortunately, there is a simple solution to this called "money" which companies have and which can be given to a developer with the skills who will magically convert that money into the time and desire to fix the problem. † If your company is willing to use open source, but only when it is perfect, and not willing to help improve it, maybe they are the doing the fucking?

talmand 13y ago
I like how you denied the "fuck you with a smile" response with the very "fuck you with a smile" response he was complaining about.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- jmathai 13y ago
  The point is that if you're a company that's relying on an open source project and not contributing back to it then you have no basis to be "fucked" by the project.
  - talmand 13y ago
    Well, I believe the person in question wasn't saying that the project itself was saying "fuck you", but the people answering the response were saying it. The point being that there are too many people that say if you don't contribute then shut the fuck up. But, of course, different people contribute in different ways. Not everyone who uses open source software are developers, and for many of these people the simple fact they use the software is their way of contributing. So when one of these people stand up and say, "I have this problem", the appropriate response is not "contribute or shut the fuck up". This is the response that is being encouraged here. It is irrelevant if the statement about a problem came from an individual or a company. The reason that such a response is a bad idea is that it actively encourages people to not use the software in question. If the goal is to get everyone to stop using open source software, then by all means continue to tell them to fuck off.
    - jmathai 13y ago
      There's more than just source code contributions that help an open source project. Being the lead dev of a fairly well used open source project I can say for certain that too many people I've had interactions with that want a bug fixed or a new feature added do so with entitlement. As if by not doing it they're being told to fuck off. I may have dramatized it a bit but there's something about software that people feel entitled to get value at no cost.
      - talmand 13y ago
        So, you treat the entire group based on the actions of individuals? Do all the people who use your software behave in this manner? Do you think it's possible that people researching your software will see any of your possible bad behavior (I don't know if you do or not) and decide not to bother? I never said that someone like you were telling people such things by not doing what they request. I'm describing people who's immediate reaction to almost anything is "only contributors may complain!" and if you don't fit that category then good for you. That means I'm not talking about you. If someone submits a bug report or feature request that you feel you cannot get to in a timely manner or don't feel is necessary then you can politely explain why. If the person responds to this with an entitled attitude then the problem then lays with that person, not you. If you respond to a bad attitude with a bad attitude then what picture are you painting to everyone else? It's classic customer service, you are polite to everyone but firm in your decisions. No one says that you must cater to every single person who says anything about your software, but you should be polite in saying no. How you say no provides a much clearer picture of your project than how you say yes.
        jmathai 13y ago
        Agree with all of that except you saying that I'm generalizing. I mentioned it is a subset, but that's the subset I'm talking about. I hope anyone who asks politely will get a polite response. But the idea of "being fucked" [1] implies some level of entitlement or deserving something. Providing feedback is very useful for open source projects. But there's a fine line between providing feedback and feeling like you're getting a "fuck you" when it's not implemented or fixed. [1] > This is the classic open-source "fuck you with a smile" response.

talmand 13y ago

I like how you denied the "fuck you with a smile" response with the very "fuck you with a smile" response he was complaining about.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jmathai 13y ago
The point is that if you're a company that's relying on an open source project and not contributing back to it then you have no basis to be "fucked" by the project.
- talmand 13y ago
  Well, I believe the person in question wasn't saying that the project itself was saying "fuck you", but the people answering the response were saying it. The point being that there are too many people that say if you don't contribute then shut the fuck up. But, of course, different people contribute in different ways. Not everyone who uses open source software are developers, and for many of these people the simple fact they use the software is their way of contributing. So when one of these people stand up and say, "I have this problem", the appropriate response is not "contribute or shut the fuck up". This is the response that is being encouraged here. It is irrelevant if the statement about a problem came from an individual or a company. The reason that such a response is a bad idea is that it actively encourages people to not use the software in question. If the goal is to get everyone to stop using open source software, then by all means continue to tell them to fuck off.
  - jmathai 13y ago
    There's more than just source code contributions that help an open source project. Being the lead dev of a fairly well used open source project I can say for certain that too many people I've had interactions with that want a bug fixed or a new feature added do so with entitlement. As if by not doing it they're being told to fuck off. I may have dramatized it a bit but there's something about software that people feel entitled to get value at no cost.
    - talmand 13y ago
      So, you treat the entire group based on the actions of individuals? Do all the people who use your software behave in this manner? Do you think it's possible that people researching your software will see any of your possible bad behavior (I don't know if you do or not) and decide not to bother? I never said that someone like you were telling people such things by not doing what they request. I'm describing people who's immediate reaction to almost anything is "only contributors may complain!" and if you don't fit that category then good for you. That means I'm not talking about you. If someone submits a bug report or feature request that you feel you cannot get to in a timely manner or don't feel is necessary then you can politely explain why. If the person responds to this with an entitled attitude then the problem then lays with that person, not you. If you respond to a bad attitude with a bad attitude then what picture are you painting to everyone else? It's classic customer service, you are polite to everyone but firm in your decisions. No one says that you must cater to every single person who says anything about your software, but you should be polite in saying no. How you say no provides a much clearer picture of your project than how you say yes.
      - jmathai 13y ago
        Agree with all of that except you saying that I'm generalizing. I mentioned it is a subset, but that's the subset I'm talking about. I hope anyone who asks politely will get a polite response. But the idea of "being fucked" [1] implies some level of entitlement or deserving something. Providing feedback is very useful for open source projects. But there's a fine line between providing feedback and feeling like you're getting a "fuck you" when it's not implemented or fixed. [1] > This is the classic open-source "fuck you with a smile" response.