Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WiringPi – deprecated

wiringpi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 151 posts

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#111

Post by kortilla »

maccard wrote: post #97
LeonM wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just free/libre/open source software that has this issue. I run an email security SaaS business. It's closed source, but the suite is free of charge to use for personal, non-commercial domains. We get numerous support requests each day of users on the free tier (who are obviously commercial users btw) that DEMAND us to fix all sorts of email problems for them. They regularly threaten that they will write a b…

> This behavior seems to be culture dependent. I'd say about 90% of our over-demanding free-tier users are from the same region on the planet. I don’t like this dog whistle and the rest of your comment was perfectly fine without it. That said, there are entitled assholes everywhere. I got an email one time asking me for source code for a university project because the guy had found I graduated that course 2 years bef…

That’s not a dog whistle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#112

Post by zucker42 »

guardiangod wrote: post #6

First of all, sorry to hear that WiringPi is deprecated, and I would like to thank the author for all the effort he put into this project. When I read his blog post on his reasoning, I can't help but be reminded of the feud between xscreensaver's author and Debian maintainers. Debian maintainers refused to upgrade the app's version and refused to remove the 'For support contact the author's email' notice. The author'…

The FSF might also be able and willing to assist with LGPL violations. Unfortunately though this may be a case with circumstantial evidence but no proof. It also often seems that the people who most willing to disregard the (L)GPL are the ones most militantly protective of their proprietary code. It's quite sad that many developers seem to think that way.

Adding an extension like that to the GPL may be problematic because it has a clause that allows users to ignore restrictive extensions (as opposed to permissive extensions).

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#113

Post by kortilla »

groundlogic wrote: post #60
ziddoap wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, sorry. I didn't realize that something you said less than half an hour ago, in the same thread, in the same context, has no business being quoted. Apologies. Who would of thought things you said previously about a subject might be brought up later in the conversation?

Don't feel bad. I've learned a lesson; never enter an open source discussion with GPL developers.

No, the lesson is to not say stuff in a discussion and then refuse to discuss it.

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#114

Post by MisterTea »

This is why I stopped thinking unfriendliness in hacker circles is unwarranted. It's massively frustrating when you get people berating/harassing/stealing from/etc you when the reality is there really isn't a product, just a passion or hobby.

This is why any open software I author comes with the express warranty of "Help: No." If no is misunderstood then any reply will be along the lines of FOAD.

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#115

Post by jnbiche »

DanBC wrote: post #99
dtech wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, if you pull shit like that that immediately is 1 point for the other team in whatever beef he had

Links on HN were generating huge amounts of negative traffic. I don't blame him for having a redirect.

OK, a redirect, but to a pornographic image?

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#116

Post by mannykannot »

flyinglizard wrote: post #15

I read this and still don’t understand what is the issue behind the drama. If you don’t want to support it, then don’t; if someone stole your public domain work, contact the EFF or more realistically just understand it’s cost of doing business. We all get tired at some point and move on, you don’t owe anyone anything. And thanks for the library!

It is a useful cautionary tale for someone contemplating doing something similar.

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#117

Post by varjag »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #34
LeonM wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just free/libre/open source software that has this issue. I run an email security SaaS business. It's closed source, but the suite is free of charge to use for personal, non-commercial domains. We get numerous support requests each day of users on the free tier (who are obviously commercial users btw) that DEMAND us to fix all sorts of email problems for them. They regularly threaten that they will write a b…

As someone who's gone back and forth on licensing for personal projects over the years, tried to engage user communities for said personal projects, and tried to use various open source projects — I totally sympathize with the maintainers. As with a lot of things in life, user engagement is a two-way street. If folks want constructive engagement from the users, there needs to be constructive engagement from the maint…

I'm not following the jump from some commercial product turning out to be vaporware to it being an OSS problem.

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#118

Post by jnbiche »

cannonedhamster wrote: post #26

The author owes nobody anything. He's already done enough. If you've given away something for free, don't expect support or anything free in the future. It's literally like taking a gift from someone and then complaining that it doesn't have enough for you to act indignant to people who give things away for free. Don't like it? Don't use it or improve it and contribute back. Want more? Pay them to build it and add it…

As someone who maintains open source software, I sympathize with the author and agree that he doesn't owe users personalized help.

However, he does have to comply with the legal requirements of the license he uses. Personally, I don't use GPL/LGPL licenses, but if I did, I'd be careful to comply with the provisions of the license.

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#119

Post by varjag »

groundlogic wrote: post #2

Step 1. Person A makes some piece of software under an open source license. (GPL) Step 2. This piece of software becomes widely used, primarily since it's open source licensed Step 3. (Modern variation) Person A feels cheated for not getting rich and creates some kind of drama. This doesn't make any sense at all, to me.

I see some people can't just wrap their mind around doing something not for profiting off others.

Re: WiringPi – deprecated

#120

Post by shakna »

jnbiche wrote: post #118
cannonedhamster wrote: post #26

The author owes nobody anything. He's already done enough. If you've given away something for free, don't expect support or anything free in the future. It's literally like taking a gift from someone and then complaining that it doesn't have enough for you to act indignant to people who give things away for free. Don't like it? Don't use it or improve it and contribute back. Want more? Pay them to build it and add it…

As someone who maintains open source software, I sympathize with the author and agree that he doesn't owe users personalized help. However, he does have to comply with the legal requirements of the license he uses. Personally, I don't use GPL/LGPL licenses, but if I did, I'd be careful to comply with the provisions of the license.

> However, he does have to comply with the legal requirements of the license he uses.

No, the author doesn't. Not really. The license governs the use of people who don't hold the copyright. That's why the author of a project can just turn around and release under a new license.

Post reply on HN