←back to thread

1113 points Bluestein | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lairv ◴[] No.41278203[source]
I use it to inspect video frames by frames, particularly being able to go back one frame. VLC doesn't support it, this thread about the feature is hilarious https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic.php?t=120627
replies(19): >>41278382 #>>41278499 #>>41278639 #>>41278719 #>>41279342 #>>41279364 #>>41279561 #>>41279827 #>>41279842 #>>41279920 #>>41280125 #>>41281214 #>>41281733 #>>41282953 #>>41283275 #>>41284169 #>>41287180 #>>41289348 #>>41289743 #
justin66 ◴[] No.41279364[source]
The developer responds to a comment:

But many players are able to do it for years.

with:

If it's so easy, why are you not doing it?

He's not just a butthole, he's a stereotypical open source developer butthole. On the other hand, if he worked for Microsoft, he'd be claiming that it takes a PhD to do it...

replies(3): >>41279587 #>>41279913 #>>41280446 #
The_Colonel ◴[] No.41279913[source]
The dev said they are happy to accept patch for this feature. Remember that you're not entitled to demand new features, as a (non-paying) user, you can't allocate dev's time to work on what you want.
replies(3): >>41280386 #>>41281011 #>>41283537 #
imiric ◴[] No.41280386{3}[source]
This card is played too often by developers who only want to work on features they personally find interesting or worthwhile.

Yes, you realistically cannot implement everything every user wants, but at the same time your software is meant to solve problems. Keeping direct communication with your users, and understanding what they find useful or not, should be the driving force of the design and features of your app.

FWIW, I've been on both sides of this discussion, as an OSS maintainer and user, and have experience with demanding users and arrogant and, yes, _lazy_ developers alike. Let's stop the narrative that users don't have the right to request features because they're not paying customers, and that this is driving developers to burn out. Communication is key to producing useful software regardless of its license. OSS development in particular is not just about throwing some code online and forgetting about it.

replies(5): >>41280579 #>>41280773 #>>41280821 #>>41281962 #>>41290085 #
1. umbra07 ◴[] No.41280773{4}[source]
A FOSS project can be FOSS and refuse all other contributions. FOSS does not make any requirements towards how the creator/main contributor handles and treats users, submitted patches, and feature requests. So no, FOSS users have zero inherent right to request anything - until the creator allows for it.

I agree that taking that kind of "closed" approach is not helpful.

replies(1): >>41282365 #
2. imiric ◴[] No.41282365[source]
> A FOSS project can be FOSS and refuse all other contributions.

It can, yes. There's nothing preventing it, except that it's a shitty way to work in the open, and you may as well make the project proprietary or source available. The maintainers might have their own vision of the project direction, and they may reject contributions, but refusing contributions outright is how forks are made. Nothing wrong with that either, but usually the projects that are more receptive and responsive to user feedback are the ones that users and developers gravitate towards.

replies(1): >>41282539 #
3. ◴[] No.41282539[source]