Seems like a skill issue on the part of the dev. GitHub lets you create issue templates and even forms. He could have made it so that every issue creator is warned that packaging issues will be ignored and closed without comment.
“We tried nothing so far and are going for the nuclear option first”
Then explain to me how the bazillion other open source cross-platform Windows-first projects do it.
Dropping support for Linux moving forward is fine, but actively going out of your way to remove the existing support is petty and just an asshole move. Especially when paired with a license that restricts 3rdparty packaging.
Also “this doesn’t work” is a bad reason not to invest the 3 minutes it takes to make an issue template, and it will already decrease the amount of packaging related issues by at least something
actively going out of your way to remove the existing support is petty and just an asshole move
Sure, but the dev doesn’t owe anything to anyone. He of course could ask community for help with this, sugar coat every answer, spend his (I assume already very valuable and sparse) free time to deal with assholes while trying to organize wider developer base to manage the issue and so on.
But he/she is still not obligated to do so and most definetly not obligated to deal with assholes all day every day instead of working with the passion project. Anyone around here thinking this is a wrong call can step up and volunteer to manage the thing, you don’t even need to know how to code, just filter trough the crap and create meaningful tickets and find people from community who’re willing to spend their time on fixing it.
Sure the dev doesn’t owe anything, but he is actively putting in the work to remove existing support. Instead of just doing nothing he is sticking it to the linux user by removing support
Edit: I don’t see how removing your own, working PKGBUILD will prevent people from installing broken 3rd party packages and complaining about it in your project.
Seems like a skill issue on the part of the dev. GitHub lets you create issue templates and even forms. He could have made it so that every issue creator is warned that packaging issues will be ignored and closed without comment.
“We tried nothing so far and are going for the nuclear option first”
People still don’t care. They’ll still open packaging related issues. And someone will still have to sift through those and close them individually.
Then explain to me how the bazillion other open source cross-platform Windows-first projects do it. Dropping support for Linux moving forward is fine, but actively going out of your way to remove the existing support is petty and just an asshole move. Especially when paired with a license that restricts 3rdparty packaging.
Also “this doesn’t work” is a bad reason not to invest the 3 minutes it takes to make an issue template, and it will already decrease the amount of packaging related issues by at least something
Sure, but the dev doesn’t owe anything to anyone. He of course could ask community for help with this, sugar coat every answer, spend his (I assume already very valuable and sparse) free time to deal with assholes while trying to organize wider developer base to manage the issue and so on.
But he/she is still not obligated to do so and most definetly not obligated to deal with assholes all day every day instead of working with the passion project. Anyone around here thinking this is a wrong call can step up and volunteer to manage the thing, you don’t even need to know how to code, just filter trough the crap and create meaningful tickets and find people from community who’re willing to spend their time on fixing it.
Sure the dev doesn’t owe anything, but he is actively putting in the work to remove existing support. Instead of just doing nothing he is sticking it to the linux user by removing support
Edit: I don’t see how removing your own, working PKGBUILD will prevent people from installing broken 3rd party packages and complaining about it in your project.