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

Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 371 posts

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#101

Post by AlienRobot »

fsflover wrote: post #93
AlienRobot wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw a guy on youtube complaining about it. He seemed to talk about FLOSS a lot and focus on the strict definition of "open source." I checked his github profile and he barely published anything. So here we have a company that made all of the code of a complete application source available being dunked by a guy who barely published any source code at all. Really put things in perspective for me.

The company broke a copyleft license though.

And if they didn't publish the code nobody would ever know about it, so what do you think the other companies will do?

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#102

Post by fsflover »

AlienRobot wrote: post #101
fsflover wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company broke a copyleft license though.

And if they didn't publish the code nobody would ever know about it, so what do you think the other companies will do?

Not breaking laws, because it can be eventually revealed one way or another? I only half joking.

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#103

Post by ipaddr »

Calavar wrote: post #61
AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't meet your definition of the word open. Of course they didn't know what they were doing. It was written by a 19-year-old in the mid 90s. The code is messy with poor licensing and some build tools were included in the repository and they wrote a dumb license for it? Who cares, they shipped a product that 10s of millions of people used and loved and wanted to share that code up to the world and instead of emb…

> It doesn't meet your definition of the word open. That's a disingenuous argument. It doesn't meet the OSI's definition of open. > the community piled on them until they said it was so not worth it that just pulled the whole thing. Yes, but let's be honest: If it wasn't the community, it would have been DMCA takedown requests from the companies whose software was published in the repo. At best, the community hastene…

Assuming they know, care and want to spend resources writing a DMCA request.

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#104

Post by renewiltord »

arp242 wrote: post #51

The trolling was ridiculous. I don't blame them. It was pretty clear that with "fork" they meant "don't create a WinAmp-ng fork" and not a "fork" in the "send a patch" GitHub sense. It's fine to point out "hey, I think your custom written license may need a bit of work!", but the amount of vitriol and hate over it (including on HN) was just ridiculous. It was one of those moments I was embarrassed to be posting here.…

There are some people you cannot help. They subscribe strongly to the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics. A few classic examples are:

- YC attempting to choose one startup to fund based on HN votes

- Winamp trying to open-source their code

- Jordan Henderson supporting the LGBTQ community

- Ellen Degeneres's sponsors offering to donate to a charity per question answered by her guests

- PETA offering to donate money for each person who chooses veganism

- Numerous open-source developers who give their things for free

It's important to know who your audience is. If they require unwavering purity, it's often better for your own sake to not engage with them. For my part, I stay clear of all these groups in a charitable sense. Everyone pays. The relationship is obvious. They'll go after the people who give them stuff for free. But for the ones who charge them it's just a transaction. That is good.

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#105

Post by fsflover »

rightbyte wrote: post #63
hypeatei wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, watching that unfold was hilarious. I also feel like some were being too harsh for no reason. The repo owner was responsive and merging PRs.

Might be another person than the one making the calls. It is abit sad that they messed up the licensing. It would be fun nostalgia to run the 'real' Winamp on Linux. Native. Emulation does not count.

Wine Is Not Emulator.

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#106

Post by Shawnecy »

arp242 wrote: post #51

The trolling was ridiculous. I don't blame them. It was pretty clear that with "fork" they meant "don't create a WinAmp-ng fork" and not a "fork" in the "send a patch" GitHub sense. It's fine to point out "hey, I think your custom written license may need a bit of work!", but the amount of vitriol and hate over it (including on HN) was just ridiculous. It was one of those moments I was embarrassed to be posting here.…

I don't agree with this take. First, licenses are what court cases and a system of laws are built on. You can't exactly fork a repo with a bad license and hope for the best. Second, this article is downplaying the fact that the repo included a lot of libraries whose licenses they were violating by including it in their repo, and there was no easy way to make the code work without those libraries. The poor license they wrote was just one of a myriad of issues. I think The Register's article is more accurately worded in this regard[0].

[0] = https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/16/opensourcing_of_winam...

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#107

Post by matheusmoreira »

seattle_spring wrote: post #91
candiddevmike wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub doesn't provide nearly enough tools for moderation though. Like restricting issue creation, comments, and discussions to only certain folks (beyond the per-issue controls).

> GitHub doesn't provide nearly enough tools for moderation though Which in itself would summon the vitriol of the super-trolls. "Moderation is censorship" is the most absolutely ridiculous mantra to gain traction in the last decade.

Gotta remind them that censorship is what governments do. Nobody is forced to associate with them.

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#108

Post by rjbwork »

seattle_spring wrote: post #91
candiddevmike wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub doesn't provide nearly enough tools for moderation though. Like restricting issue creation, comments, and discussions to only certain folks (beyond the per-issue controls).

> GitHub doesn't provide nearly enough tools for moderation though Which in itself would summon the vitriol of the super-trolls. "Moderation is censorship" is the most absolutely ridiculous mantra to gain traction in the last decade.

Moderation is censorship, because moderation is an editorial choice. The fallacy is that all censorship is bad, not that moderation is censorship. Not all content needs to be given consideration in all contexts. In fact, if that were somehow an inherent good, actual communication would be impossible as noise overtakes signal.

Re: Winamp deletes entire GitHub source code repo after a rocky few weeks

#110

Post by [deleted] »

arp242 wrote: post #51

The trolling was ridiculous. I don't blame them. It was pretty clear that with "fork" they meant "don't create a WinAmp-ng fork" and not a "fork" in the "send a patch" GitHub sense. It's fine to point out "hey, I think your custom written license may need a bit of work!", but the amount of vitriol and hate over it (including on HN) was just ridiculous. It was one of those moments I was embarrassed to be posting here.…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN