Re: [gentoo-user] Removing pulseaudio

[Canek Peláez Valdés]

On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
> On 28/04/2013 02:24, Randy Barlow wrote:
>> The project that I work on does not "force" you to use MongoDB. However,
>> if you wish you make use of my project in the way it was intended to be
>> used without modifications, you will need to use MongoDB. It's a hard
>> dependency. Nobody is forcing you to use my project, and there are
>> alternatives you can choose from. You also have the freedom to git clone
>> us, and change it to use SQLite, or MariaDB, or PostgreSQL, or anything
>> else you like (however, if you use LDAP as a database, I know someone
>> who might hunt you down!) By the nature of us giving you the code with
>> an Open Source license (GPL), it's freedom for you, not force.
>
> This paragraph highlights the essential difference.
>
> You don't say what your project is, but reading between the lines I
> think it's safe to assume it's a somewhat niche project with specific
> goals that solves a specific problem, right?
>
> Such projects come with their dep list as you pointed out and this only
> affects the machines that project runs on. In eight years hanging out on
> this list I don't recall any cases of users complaining about deps of
> projects in such a class.

The problem is that they (mostly) only complain. If they stepped in,
they could take care of the (alleged) issue.

And, BTW, in ten years of hanging out on this list I recall *many* a
occasion where users complained about basically everything. I recall a
user that had "USE=-mysql" and complained that wordpress (or another
similar webapp) still pulled in MySQL.

But even if it's really worse now than in whatever number of years you
want to recall, if they only complain then is basically useless.

> What we complain about here is basic low-level software changes that
> affect much more than just their own little universe, and will do it ON
> ALL LINUX MACHINES NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.

The source is out there NOW AND IN THE FUTURE. If there is enough
developers interested in maintaining something, it will be maintained;
but you cannot force no developer to maintain nothing.

You (and others) can complain about the choices of some developers;
but you cannot force them to do the things the way you want to.

> That is a whole different kettle of fish entirely and is interpreted
> very differently from what your project does, this is the point where
> the analogies break down. Regardless of how similar two things may
> appear on technical merit, the reaction of users is always the deciding
> factor.

With all due respect, BS. The deciding factor is what the developers
choose to do, and (secondarily) if enough users are interested (and
*CAPABLE*) enough of taking care of the situation and stepping in to
do a fork or some similar alternative.

Free software works as a meritocracy; no matter how badly (or loudly)
a group of users react, if they don't back up their complaining with
code, it doesn't really matters. And this is true even if the
complaining users is a "majority" (which, BTW, we don't really know if
that's the case).

> udev rules changed network names for all recently updated Linux machines
> everywhere.

And in most distributions most users will not even notice. And if they
do, the can stop updating udev. Or switch to eudev, or to mdev, or to
a static dev tree. And if they really really care, they can step in
and code a solution: the code is out there.

> Separate /usr caused changes to many machines not using an initrd, and
> will continue to do that for all time.

And many of us actually believe that is a good idea, and it seems that
is faster to boot with an initrd than without:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/108087225644395745666/posts/H9CFBQLG8S8

But if you don't believe is a good idea, go and use OpenRC. Or
Upstart. Or step in and code a solution.

> systemd changes how sysadmins start and shutdown their machines, and how
> that works for every service on the host whether the sysadmin likes it
> or not.

They can keep maintaining SysV/Upstart/OpenRC if they really care.
Otherwise, the benefits of using systemd outweighs the (small)
inconvenience of learning something new.

> PA makes deep changes to how the machines handles sound, and the user
> for the most part never agreed to have those changes. The user agreed to
> use Gnome and the change came in from left field unexpected.

He can switch to KDE, or XCFE, or Enlightment. Or he can use MATE or
Cinnamon. Or he can step in and code the necessary to use GNOME
without PA.

He cannot (and he will not) force any developer to do anything the
developer doesn't want to do.

> With your project, the user knows upfront they will need MongoDB, they
> make an informed decision about this before ever emerging your code at
> all. So your analogy doesn't really hold true. A much better analogy
> would be if your project used MySQL and one day you required them to
> upgrade to Oracle (and not the free one either...).

That analogy makes no sense whatsoever. All the projects you don't
agree with (systemd/udev, PulseAudio, GNOME, etc.) are Free Software.
How can you compare them with Oracle "(and not the free one
either...)"

The code is OUT THERE. It will be *always*. Even if Randy's project
switched to Oracle, since it is Free Software his users could take the
code and keep using MySQL.

> Plus, you don't
> really give them a choice - you also say that all support for all
> currently released versions will end in 6-12 months. You are giving the
> *apparency* of choice, whilst creating the *reality* of no (or very
> little) choice. Does this not look to you a lot like lock-in?

No is not, because the code is there for *anyone* to do something if
they are capable and willing enough.

We are circling the same arguments here; you don't like the decisions
some projects take and how they affect their issues. In your view, the
developers have to do things your way since you (or other users) are
using their projects.

You are plainly wrong, and the proof of that is that many developers
in the Linux stack (from kernel to user applications, passing through
distributions including Gentoo) are simply not listening to users like
yourself. And that many users (like me) support them.

You may not like that; but arguing here (or any other place) will not
change it. Only people doing the coding get to have a say in the
matter.

Regards.
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México