Quite remarkable that you call the developer toxic when those were his replies paraphrasing what users had said and demanded up-thread.
> that is no way to talk about other volunteer developers that contribute their time.
He is not dissing the other developers. He is one of those developers that had been called lazy and incompetent by the forum posters. For example (from the thread):
> it's mostly an excuse to not implement the feature (and be "cool" about it with one-word answers).
> Please consider implementing this. It's not hard.
> All of the players I've named are open source, so it's easy to check how they are doing it.
> Seriously how hard is it to implement it? All Ive been hearing from the developers are excuses, excuses, excuses. I dont see how other players were able to have it. This is just pure laziness.
> I'm not here to program the app, I'm just here to find a simple feature and/or request it.
Personally, I would hold the people using a free product and begging for features without contributing anything to a higher standard than the developers that donate their time implementing it.
Yes ok, I did read the thread but didn't get the reference. I wouldn't say it's "quite remarkable", more simply that I misunderstood. My apologies.
But I stand by the broader point that I do not think his attitude is at all constructive or helpful, and while I am sure he is fed of up what he views as entitled users this is not a productive way to handle it. The toxicity is that it casts shade on FOSS and pushes people away from the community. And VLC would be half what it is today without it's users. He would do well to remember that, too.
> And VLC would be half what it is today without it's users. He would do well to remember that, too.
I disagree. It would be exactly the same as it is now without the users. The users have not contributed anything to the project. Popularity doesn't write code, it just creates communication overhead.
Again, this is not commercial software. Commercial software needs popularity. For FOSS projects, popularity is cool and can be an ego-boost for the maintainers, even open some doors and get some funding, but it's not the point of thing (and never covers costs anyway). The point is to write some good code that scratches some itch the maintainers have.
That whole point of view from the users, of "you owe us because your thing is popular now" is toxic entitlement. If you didn't contribute to the project, you didn't affect it, and you're owed nothing, absolutely nothing, by the maintainers. Everyone would do well to remember that.
Ah, fair enough. I think we agree mostly then - he is fed up, he is justified in it, yet it is not very productive. (I wouldn't call it toxic, though.)
> that is no way to talk about other volunteer developers that contribute their time.
He is not dissing the other developers. He is one of those developers that had been called lazy and incompetent by the forum posters. For example (from the thread):
> it's mostly an excuse to not implement the feature (and be "cool" about it with one-word answers).
> Please consider implementing this. It's not hard.
> All of the players I've named are open source, so it's easy to check how they are doing it.
> Seriously how hard is it to implement it? All Ive been hearing from the developers are excuses, excuses, excuses. I dont see how other players were able to have it. This is just pure laziness.
> I'm not here to program the app, I'm just here to find a simple feature and/or request it.
Personally, I would hold the people using a free product and begging for features without contributing anything to a higher standard than the developers that donate their time implementing it.