Open Source

30982 readers

466 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

160

Why FOSS projects are using proprietary, privacy invasive infrastructure? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

126 comments fedilink hide all child comments

As you can easily notice, today many open source projects are using some services, that are… sus.

For example, Github is the most popular place to store your project code and we all know, who owns it. And not to forget that sketchy AI training on every line of your code. Don't we have alternatives? Oh, yes we have. Gitlab, Codeberg, Notabug, etc. You can even host your own Gitea or Forgejo instance if you want.

Also, Crowdin is very popular in terms of software (and docs) translation. Even Privacy Guides and The New Oil use Crowdin, even though we have FLOSS Weblate, that you can easily self-host or use public instances.

So, my question is: if you are building a FLOSS / privacy related project, why using proprietary and privacy invasive tools?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, I don't see this discussion going anywhere given that you are doing your best to misunderstand me, turn my words around on me and just can't move even one step away from your idealism and instead demand that maintainers cater to that as well on top of everything else.

Have a nice day, I'm out, I have a project to maintain and a community to manage.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think he's coming from here:

As an developer you create a solution to a problem from yours. You release it under a FOSS license.

Your job is done - You shared your work. The community may find your project useful and builds upon it. Their interest is to get their changes upstream. You have no obligation to help with onboarding and implementing features for others.

So if they are requesting a merge you may reject it since it does not meet your standards. Maybe you have to make your stance clear and create a CONTRIBUTION alongside your code.

With this mindset you wouldn't hang out on a non-indexable platform.

Your project mostlikely is requesting explicit participation. Maybe this is the point in between you guys.

Now go on with the discussion :)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Finally a comment with some sense. 100% agree

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago

@foosel Saying that I demand maintainers to cater to my requests can be easily disproven by just looking at my words above where I say the exact opposite. Then who is doing their best to misunderstand and turn words around?