Programming

I say thanks to open source maintainers all the time! 😄

Anyway, while a wall of profanity and fuck you is clearly not ok, I do disagree with this:

The maintainers ship this for free. People run production businesses on top of it, for free.

Just because you offer something for free doesn't absolve you of all moral responsibility. I'm not saying you have a lot of responsibility, but "it's free so you can't complain!" is pure nonsense.

Go and give some kids free poisoned sweets and see how far that gets you.

Yeah, I started a major project 20 years that got a lot of attention.

I gave it up after a few months because whilst there was a lot of support, you have to constantly fight against a holes who will tell you how much you suck compared to other options, or how unnecessary you are

"Sorry about that. We will issue a full refund."

I don't think there's a particular need to defuse into a productive discussion. Something like that, with no repro or respect - lock and close, with a comment on why/that onproductive and disrespectful/what it could have been.

Tone should always be respectful. Something like this should have been a respectful, open suggestion, explaining the issues no clear semver causes.

If they don't respond to your needs - you can accept it or leave/fork.

From the license:

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.

It's the necessary tradeoff of free/open source software. You get something for free and with permission to do (almost) anything with it, but you get no warranties.

If this user had simply pointed out the issue it'd have been totally fine, the dev(s) might have missed it and it'd be helpful to let them know. The entitlement shown here is not OK in any way, regardless of the validity of the point made.

Coming from /all, not a programmer, user of multiple FOSS, ... thank you thank you thank you! I'm grateful I've been able to leave subscription ecosystems without a loss of important tool sets.

Complains about improper release management.

Apparently not using lockfiles for prod.

This is not a serious developer.

Guy keeps talking about their "customers" and they don't charge a dime. I'm not sure that word means what he thinks it means. They have users, and that's exactly what he's acting like.

The first version included a 'Fuck you' but they edited it away.

Naah, I don't really demand anything if the author breaks something on update. I just asked if the breaking changes are intentional and if there's a workaround. Failing that, I revert and look for other libraries or roll my own. To me Open Source is always about making something you love without any obligation. Not even to follow semver.

This guy has a public identity and even has some very starred repos. I wonder if he gave so much as a thought regarding his whole company seeing his disgusting attitude.

I don't think it's valid to simultaneously present open-source as a legitimate alternative for paid software, while also saying you can't have expectations of the software or trust its guarantees (ie. semver) because it's just a volunteer project. If you're presenting your OSS in the serious space of choices for its niche, it will (and should be!) held to a high standard. If it can't be, then don't present it as a real alternative. I've noticed this (mostly-unintentional) conflation between serious OSS competitors and hobby projects in almost every discussion on this topic I've seen.

I thought the proper way to treat maintainers was to shamelessly and immediately volunteer other people's labor for endless forks every time something we don't like happens?

Optimocracy depends on respecting maintainers.