Comment by randmeerkat
10 months ago
> Turns out FOSS devs are humas just like everybody else and suffer from the same flaws.
It is rather anticlimactic. I had always imagined FOSS to be this free exchange of ideas, thoughtful consideration, and intentional action. Seeing what it has become though… Maybe closed source is better.
> Maybe closed source is better.
I've had similar pissing matches in closed source development, instigated by me and not...
Often, these things get resolved or left simmering without any public visibility, so that's nice as a user. And there's usually a somewhat clear heirarchy of authority, where the boss can say I don't care who's right, do X; which resolves issues in ways that sometimes a technically minded open source project can't; that can often help with bikeshedding between usable options.
But sometimes you just keep working somewhere because deep in your heart of hearts you want to do it your way, and once that other person quits or maybe even goes on vacation, you can. And sometimes people endeavor to actively push that person out, which I guess I've seen on FOSS drama too, but office politics have a way of lurking under the surface more, IMHO.
> Seeing what it has become though… Maybe closed source is better.
You thought it was better in the past? Read up on the great ncurses maintainer drama. Or the NetBSD/OpenBSD split. Or FreeBSD/DragonflyBSD split. Or the Emacs forks, GNU libc forks, GCC fork, etc. etc. etc.
This kind of drama has always existed. Difficult people have always existed. And even good people have always been struggling with their emotions.
And in all my closed-source $dayjobs I've had to deal with all of that too. Sometimes significantly worse than I'm seeing here.
> Maybe closed source is better.
At least in some cases this is plausible. The money people get for working on closed source software irons out some issues, for example:
Some people who voluntarily work on open source code do it for self-actualization, which indicates that they have a strong desire to push their wishes through. This implies that a lot of drama gets involved if these people don't get their way.
> Seeing what it has become though...
Was it ever different? Not as far as I can remember at least. I think one of the main strengths of open source development is that it works despite the drama.
With open source projects, everybody is free to start their own fork over disagreements, and if the fork actually turns out to be objectively better it will replace the original project.
> Maybe closed source is better.
It's the same and worse over there, the drama just isn't public.
This is much less likely in a company. Any sane company decides on a clear direction which way to go. Either do X and put resources in it, or not and instead focus on something else. They may change directions, but never "maybe X" at a specific point in time. Someone at the company makes a decision on this.
Of course, with notable exceptions. See Apple Car, Android tablets etc.
> It's the same and worse over there, the drama just isn't public.
At least you’re getting paid. What’s the point of spending one’s free time arguing with strangers on the internet over some code that will be refactored anyway ten years from now..? Life is short, have fun, enjoy it. If you’re spending time or money on something that sucks, walk away.
> "Maybe closed source is better."
I assure you it isn't; it really, really isn't. You don't see the drama because 1) it's behind closed doors and 2) because the people involved know their job is at risk if they cross the line.
I hate to mention this but closed source appears to involve humans too. I was disappointed when I discovered this as well.
"People are a problem" - Douglas Adams
[dead]
FOSS devs put a lot of time in what they do and they are understandably attached to whether what they do is good/successful, at least in the same proportion the general population is (but arguably more due to how much dedication goes into FOSS, kind of by construction)