61–70 of 407 posts
> Isn’t there a better way? There is. Ditch Apple and use sane systems without some control obsessive entities constantly hovering over you and dictating you how to (or not to) use them. Developers abandoning Apple should be the taste of their own medicine for them.
That’s not the issue.
It is buried in the footnotes of the post, but the ultimate reason behind going closed source is that Google built their enterprise GDrive syncing client for mac off a fork of osxfuse. The original author of osxfuse feels entitled to some compensation for that and is doing his damnedest to make it happen.
It's why contributing to a BSD-licensed project as a hobby can feel a bit icky, and doing the same on a GPL-licensed project doesn't.
It is buried in the footnotes of the post, but the ultimate reason behind going closed source is that Google built their enterprise GDrive syncing client for mac off a fork of osxfuse. The original author of osxfuse feels entitled to some compensation for that and is doing his damnedest to make it happen.
I'm not sure if the dev feels entitled for _compensation_ per se, but G and other companies don't contribute back to the project in any form. Not $ and not in code. Now that is not a very good thing... though technically that's exactly what you get with permissive O/S licenses. It looks like the dev realized that and changed the license. It also doesn't look like he trusts this companies much, because otherwise he co…
Amit Singh literally created the project while at Google.
Mr Fleischer has done a huge amount of unpaid work so a narrow segment of wealthy software workers can avoid the choice between paying for proprietary software and supporting Free Software, after spending thousands of dollars on a MacOS system
No world has ever produced a violin small enough to play an elegy for those “victims.”
If you wanted a Free Software FUSE, maybe a Linux desktop would have been a better choice?
I'm surprised it doesn't say anything about security concerns with depending on a single individual to develop a kernel module without any ability to audit the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not childish. That's the main problem with open source as a whole: devs expect somebody else to maintain projects indefinitely long, for free. This is what's unsustainable. See "Software below poverty line": https://staltz.com/software-below-the-poverty-line.html
As discussed in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20174418 , with comments from devs represented in that "Software below poverty line" article, the interpretation from the article is seriously flawed.
Most comments are:
- it's true
- exploitation is a wrong term
- you don't take into account devs who are already employees and work on OSS
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only thing I can remember is that VLC was removed from AppStore due to GPL.
That was because one of the contributors made a (legally sound if unsporting) copyright claim though wasn't it?
Likely the best outcome for the project barring company sponsorship that pays him to continue working on it as OSS. He's been the sole maintainer on the project since 2012 [1] and has never been compensated for it, he says it will always be free to end users but wants companies that are financially benefiting from it to help sponsor continued development [2]: > I will never ask end users for financial support. FUSE w…
Good for him. I hope we see more of this in the future: developers realising that the work they do has value and that they’re not required to spend their lives giving it away for free. So they take control of their work product and start capturing some of that value for themselves. It’s a shame that the article is written in this tone, as it mirrors the dominant sentiment among open source folks. There is still a lot…
> It’s a shame that the article is written in this tone The article seemed pretty neutral excluding the slightly shady stuff like not mentioning the license change properly, timely or even in expected locations > the dominant sentiment among open source folks The dominant sentiment of open source folks is that they want open source instead of proprietary software? That seems expected, it’s after all the whole point.…