When you’re talking to an open source dev, just remember that they are literally giving you their time for free, and they are people who don’t like to be treated poorly.
Edit: Just to be clear, I don’t mean any ill will toward the guy. He’s frustrated and he’s just taking it out in the wrong venue at the wrong people, but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad person.
Edit 2: The reinstalling he’s talking about is NPM. So just running npm install. It’s because he tried removing the node_modules directory, which is a reasonable thing to do, but it means you need to reinstall the modules with that command.
Don’t be that second guy, use Nix.
I agree with OP, but the whole confrontation could’ve been avoided in the first place if all dependencies were spelled out to the letter in the form of a flake.nix with the latest accompanying flake.lock file.
Yes, but one of our promises is real… Just a real pain in the ass sometimes.
@AlmightySnoo @Ashiette us for USA or for us? :stallman:
It’s a frontend JavaScript UI library. I can’t control what other dependencies people install alongside my library, or even whether they follow my library’s dependency list.
Isn’t package.json for controlling what dependency versions people install with?
I think I’m missing something.
Yeah JavaScript is a horrible language and ecosystem in a lot of ways, but package.json and friends don’t really give me much trouble.
And even if you hose something, you should be able to clear it out and reinstall easily.
I’m assuming the maintainer didn’t (knowingly) make a breaking change in a minor/patch release. That’s a high crime.
Yes, and I have a package.json that lists dependencies and the versions I test with. You can force a different version though. I don’t think that’s what happened here. I’m guessing it’s a version of some dependency that should work, because it was released as a minor version within the range I specified, but doesn’t actually work.
It could also be an issue with the build system/bundler, which I can’t really control either.
Don’t be the guy who ignores reports that your software doesn’t work with new dependency versions just because you can’t be arsed to test with anything else even if the report looks like a legitimate problem.
I have been testing with the original reporter of the problem. This guy came in, said he had the same problem, then cursed at me.
That was less directed at you and more at the idea that just pinning versions solves the issue which is unfortunately very frequent among proponents of things like vendoring, nix, Docker containers and similar tools that allow a project to stay on an old version for potentially years. Sorry if that came across that way.
I think it’s funny. We are the new “I use Arch, BTW” and I’m happy to embrace it.
I just hate having to re-configure all my stuff whenever I set up a new box 🤷
The self entitlement in open-source these days never fails to astound me.
See also: the hard parts of open source.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
the hard parts of open source.
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I just watched this, it was a very good video, experienced a lot of the same things he did/does, thx. Was really interesting learning about the history of some these “alienated loner with god-complex” that was cultivated in early tech. Also good stuff about how the purpose for a given space shapes the discussion and interactions.
A lot of us understand the problem: that silicon-valley, in pursuit of profits and engagement, has wrecked peoples brains with traumatizing ragebait for years, and how stressful it makes all of our lives. We have to do everything we can to make these spaces the opposite: enjoyable, fun, and at the same time not addictive.
There is always a risk using libraries from others. If you install something without knowing what you are doing and without considering the risks, you should not be installing it.
You are literally sending 99% of the new Linux users back to Windows haha. C’ mon its not that hard, look at what custom ROM developers do. They put a big disclaimer warning of the risks of installing the software. You won’t find a single user blaming the devs for a bricked phone, and there are lot of them. The one who has to consider the risks and warn about them is the dev, just because (s)he is the one who knows the software better and not all users are developers and they usually don’t know what are the risks.
You can install shit in Windows too, it is exactly the same case when grandma installs too many toolbars in Internet Explorer 6. No one is warning you there that you might be installing malware.
What I mean is that there are already curated repositories for each distro that can be accessed easily by the package manager. If you go outside of your package manager and repos, gloves are off, you better know what you are doing.
Regarding custom ROMs, since you brought it up and being a custom ROM enthusiast, there are still a lot of complaints, nastiness and pressure from the users similar to this. Installing a ROM has definitely a higher knowledge barrier and that makes you aware of the risks, also you will brick your phone before you are able to install a ROM… if you don’t know what you are doing.
Finally, the developer here in this very lemmy post mentions that the OP of that bug report was working with them in order to solve the issue. The one on the screenshot was just a random dude unnecessarily being rude. Free software is usually delivered as is with no warranties, specifically small projects and libraries.
Thanks for coming to my TED.talk
You are wasting my time! I demand a refund, where is open source’s manager!?
