No announcement yet.

PulseAudio 15 Released With Bluetooth Improvements, Better Hardware Support

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by sandy8925 View Post
    I have extreme doubts about death threats, I'd really like to see proof of that.

    Really this is as good as I give you on it. two reasons.
    1) He did a really good job of clean up. Include making sure all the mirrors of the mailing list also removed like they would remove spam garbage and archive sites being informed to nuke out of existence.
    2) Its illegal to republish death threats.

    Only way you could see it would be go to someone who was maintaining a archive before they were removed and that person is willing to let you look. Please note there are legal risks to letting person look at death threats.

    Originally posted by sandy8925 View Post
    Hm, alright, thanks for the info. That makes sense now.

    Honestly though, companies can fuck off asking independent maintainers to do large amounts of work for free. I'm not going to do shit for free, those rich bastards at the top can pay me the same 150,000 USD annual salary if they want people to do major amounts of work.

    They'll happily take your work for free, but won't do crap for you at the end.
    The reality is you can say no doing something with while not being abusive about it. Yes you can ask if a person is willing to-do something far more nicely than what the maintainer did. Like he could have been like we need the gstreamer feature due to this patent risk are you willing to-do or at least willing to let a assigned developer work on it.

    Something to remember not all cases can a company in fact employ particular people. Like the way I wrote that is not ideal I know.
    Sandy think about this problem you are the company maintainer you need to know
    1) if person is working on the feature you need so you do not double assign work. Remember with openaptx with just a submit that does not include what is on that developers road map.
    2) if you do assign a paid person to assist as in do like 99% of the work if the person who did the work first is going to take offence to this.
    3) Legalities.

    The number 3 is the big difference. The company people will have proper legal team. That legal team means they see problems others don't. Like straight dynamic loader of the library without the gstreamer over head seams to make sense. But this means that bluez would have the qualcomm feature as a build option. As a built option qualcomm might cause problems with patents. With the MP3 it was proven in court that gstreamer code splitting gives enough legal isolation.

    Reality is you don't want companies with patents disrupting your end users.

    When you read over it all its bad communication all round. The maintainer not describing why he asking for gstreamer support clearly. The maintainers wording for the request for gstreamer support is "would it be possible" for gstreamer support. This has been horrible language habit of the maintainer that people who know him will respond yes but I don't have the time to-do it and he will then offer to assign paid developer to-do work. Please note "would it be possible" was not in " but its the common bit of text the maintainer users.

    We don't have standard for how to respond to patches in the open source world to say "we need X feature can you do it yes/no if you cannot will you let someone work on the code yes/no and can the first answer no change if you are offered money/employment todo it".

    This does lead to about once ever 5-10 years this death spiral of failed communication in the open source world. Most of time everyone wakes up and stops before crashing into the ground. The openaptx case its nicely impacted in the ground. How to get it back from there not simple.