4 ms·

When the producers of open source programs, scripts, and utilities spend some of their time, intelligence, and thought on this planet to produce something usefu

When the producers of open source programs, scripts, and utilities spend some of their time, intelligence, and thought on this planet to produce something useful and give that product of their effort away for free, it gets seriously disenheartening to have someone else make a dumb comment, or create an issue out of anger which is unjustified due to the consumer of that product not having read either the documentation, or the source code they decided to use. Other ways of pissing us off are asking a question which is obviously facepalm-inducingly stupid due to again not having read the documentation/code, or trying to use the product whilst simulataneously not having the first clue on what they're doing (which could be because they're new at coding or handling computer systems in general). When a producer of Free Stuff gets the kind of bullcrap described above, it wears them down over time. I have encountered this with my stuff - especially in comments on my blog. I do try to answer questions and be as helpful as possible, but there are some people out there who you just know can't be bothered to do some basic research, or read your helpful instructions, or are basically just too lazy to learn and only want to consume without thinking. This is what wears people down. It's not just one crappy issue being raised on your stuff in Github, it's the accumulation of this cruft over time - like hundreds of straws piling up on your camel's back - eventually it'll break.

Sorgam 12y ago
Keep in mind that every alternative free library to do something adds cost to the task of selecting a library. Some open source projects (not suggesting any specifically) actually do make life worse for people because they spend time studying it only to find it's not useful.
- scarygliders 12y ago
  In my book, spending the time to see whether something is useful (or works) or not, is called "due diligence". I'm also of the opinion that the time spent raking through libraries that look useful to you to find out if they really are useful to you, more than offsets time you'll spend looking for bugs in your program which were caused by using something which turned out to not do what you thought it did.
qwerta 12y ago
As maintainer of OS project I find this issue justified and constructive. It points to usability problem and how to fix it (documentation). And poster did his homework by debugging script first. He enumerates missing chars (easy to unit tests!) and clearly spells reason (underlying library). I would love to have such reports all the time!!!
- scarygliders 12y ago
  As a creator and maintainer of OS projects, I have to disagree for the following reasons; 1) It is clear from the issue raised, that the creator of the issue did not do his homework. This means actually looking at the README file, and, seeing that the project "exposes the Phantom Open Emoji library unicode/image assets and APIs for working with them", proceed to the link to the Phantom Open Emoji library that the author took the time and trouble to provide a clickable link to , and read on from there. 2) Additionally, the creator of the issue then posted a link to an alternative project. Ergo, not only was the creator of the issue being lazy in the first place, he then tried to punish the author of the project for that laziness. If you really cannot see this, then I suggest looking again at the project's README, how it describes itself, clicking through to the Phantom Open Emoji library link provided, and reading the information there. Then re-think your opinion on this matter.

Sorgam 12y ago

Keep in mind that every alternative free library to do something adds cost to the task of selecting a library. Some open source projects (not suggesting any specifically) actually do make life worse for people because they spend time studying it only to find it's not useful.

scarygliders 12y ago
In my book, spending the time to see whether something is useful (or works) or not, is called "due diligence". I'm also of the opinion that the time spent raking through libraries that look useful to you to find out if they really are useful to you, more than offsets time you'll spend looking for bugs in your program which were caused by using something which turned out to not do what you thought it did.

qwerta 12y ago

As maintainer of OS project I find this issue justified and constructive. It points to usability problem and how to fix it (documentation). And poster did his homework by debugging script first. He enumerates missing chars (easy to unit tests!) and clearly spells reason (underlying library). I would love to have such reports all the time!!!

scarygliders 12y ago
As a creator and maintainer of OS projects, I have to disagree for the following reasons; 1) It is clear from the issue raised, that the creator of the issue did not do his homework. This means actually looking at the README file, and, seeing that the project "exposes the Phantom Open Emoji library unicode/image assets and APIs for working with them", proceed to the link to the Phantom Open Emoji library that the author took the time and trouble to provide a clickable link to , and read on from there. 2) Additionally, the creator of the issue then posted a link to an alternative project. Ergo, not only was the creator of the issue being lazy in the first place, he then tried to punish the author of the project for that laziness. If you really cannot see this, then I suggest looking again at the project's README, how it describes itself, clicking through to the Phantom Open Emoji library link provided, and reading the information there. Then re-think your opinion on this matter.