1w ago

DuckStation dev dropping support for Linux

github.com

Scripts: Remove PKGBUILD · stenzek/duckstation@30df16c

The post says AUR builds are being blocked and soon Linux support will be dropped entirely.

45 comments

Explanation: https://lemmy.world/comment/18532107
tl;dr dude is a bit of a control freak
- dude has a PhD and the social skills of the paper it's printed on
  
  That's insulting to the paper.
  
  Not to break a few illusions of scholastic integrity, but when making a doctoral thesis, you're not there to make friends. Social skills drop as you go up the academic ladder, and it's designed this way.
  I'm not saying I sympathize either, but society doesn't make it easier for masters to earn their doctorates. A simple “Who was your day, wanna go grab tea, hey let's unwind at xyz” does resharpen social skills like you won't believe.
Dev doesn't allow packages of his open source project, people keep creating packages, dev stops support for the OS entirely.
- jwz & Igara Studio S.A. had the exact same issue with distros maintainers, that they were forced to disallow QA testing and logging for distro related situations that really isn't their focus.
  Distro makers need to dogfood their own packages, their own support system, and their testing, separate of the original software maker.
  Analogy for commoners:
  This is like asking a bidet seat maker to fix your entire toilet/bathroom.
  Like no, get plumbers, workers, and a designer to make your dream toilet. Leave the seat maker alone.
  
  My take on a better analogy:
  The bidet maker is pissed because people complain to him that their bidet is leaking or has cracks. He's annoyed at a distribution/installation company because they fumbled, so he'll handle installation himself but only to the houses he approves.
  Oh, and the bidets are free and nobody gets paid a cent.
make free open source software
people repackage for their distros
get mad when you receive support requests for outdated packages
change license to prevent further repackages
Linux users continue using old version to avoid restrictive license change
Continue to receive support requests for old packages before license change
crash out
Am I doing this right?
- Yes but be sure to be condescending through it all
  
  The entitlement is strong. But not with the person who creates an open source emulator in their spare time and gives it away for free, but for those who demand free support.
  It's a quite common issue with open source stuff.
  Dude makes a thing.
  Dude thinks maybe others could benefit from it, so he gives it away for free
  Entitled morons think customer is king also applies for stuff they didn't pay for and demand free support
  Dude gets overwhelmed and frustrated by having to play free customer support hotline for his free product and after a while pulls back
  Entitled morons get up in arms and call dude condescending and worse for not doing free customer support for the free thing, somehow believing that dude owes them something.
And you can't even fork it
- From the looks of it the version most people use (the one that comes in package managers) was already forked awhile ago from the version the dev did allow to be forked, and the official version hasn't been used in package managers for awhile, because the second version was under a read only license and distros therefore couldn't package it.
- Sure you can. Absolutely nothing actually prevents it.
  
  The licence is not FOSS its its creative commons no derivatives meaning no forks its a source available licence
  
  License doesn't allow you to do it
Sucks that people are so shitty about problems that crop up in FOSS. Just be nice about things and it wouldn't be a problem, the developer owes you nothing.
- Homie doesnt let you fork the shit to maintain it yourself. He made the problem.
  
  Just do it anyways, fuck what he wants.
  
  Doesn't change how people treat developers. I gather this guy isn't that great, but people should just move elsewhere instead of being hostile.
  
  Then it's not FOSS.
- The dev forbids packaging his emulator via licence. I'm pleading that they're the asshole here.
  
  Because he kept getting entitled support requests for badly packaged versions of his project in some linux distros.
- Stenzek seems to have a history of being the problem... I don't know if their words should be taken at face value, or that they're arguing in good faith at all
Two things can be true at the same time:
I am grateful you are using your time to develop free and open source software without gaining anything in return.
Being pissed at people asking for support for something you didn't make, do not give you a free pass on being an asshole by changing your license
it is okay for a FOSS project to start with one person.
but if it is growing and there is still only one persons doing most commits, that is a yellow flag. sign to look at alternatives.
i am speaking as both user and maintainer.
- He even rewrote parts of the code that weren't by him in order to remove the GPL license.
Retroarch keeping the core anyway, probably not the best ps1 core even if it dissappear.
- I prefer Beetle PSX (the non-hw version). Very accurate emulation, even compared to Duckstation. Not as great for enhancements, though.
I think I've been using pcsxr for too long to care.
Is there anything that makes duckstation worth using over the other psx emulators?
- Apparently it's really good. I think I have it on my steam deck. But I recently just dusted off a ps3 (which has a ps1 built in) made it network ready and viola.

45 comments