to do or not to do - publish OPEN LETTER to "blueZ" developers?
-
here is "an official" web site " BlueZ[^] After months of " futzing " around with different versions of "official Linux Bluetooth stack " - "blueZ" library and its lack of documentation / follow -up / support I like to do what is customary POST A REVIEW addressed to the original company who sponsored (?) this abortion of so called software I do realize they can fire me stop me from participating in any forums post canned letter about how wonderful service they provide let AI ask "need more information..." or simply ignore me Any suggestions for "alternative action" ? Not using "blueZ' is NOT an option - it is stuck "as is " in Linux kernel ... Cheers
-
here is "an official" web site " BlueZ[^] After months of " futzing " around with different versions of "official Linux Bluetooth stack " - "blueZ" library and its lack of documentation / follow -up / support I like to do what is customary POST A REVIEW addressed to the original company who sponsored (?) this abortion of so called software I do realize they can fire me stop me from participating in any forums post canned letter about how wonderful service they provide let AI ask "need more information..." or simply ignore me Any suggestions for "alternative action" ? Not using "blueZ' is NOT an option - it is stuck "as is " in Linux kernel ... Cheers
-
here is "an official" web site " BlueZ[^] After months of " futzing " around with different versions of "official Linux Bluetooth stack " - "blueZ" library and its lack of documentation / follow -up / support I like to do what is customary POST A REVIEW addressed to the original company who sponsored (?) this abortion of so called software I do realize they can fire me stop me from participating in any forums post canned letter about how wonderful service they provide let AI ask "need more information..." or simply ignore me Any suggestions for "alternative action" ? Not using "blueZ' is NOT an option - it is stuck "as is " in Linux kernel ... Cheers
Dear Microsoft ... I don't like your operating system. Please fix it. Thank you.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
here is "an official" web site " BlueZ[^] After months of " futzing " around with different versions of "official Linux Bluetooth stack " - "blueZ" library and its lack of documentation / follow -up / support I like to do what is customary POST A REVIEW addressed to the original company who sponsored (?) this abortion of so called software I do realize they can fire me stop me from participating in any forums post canned letter about how wonderful service they provide let AI ask "need more information..." or simply ignore me Any suggestions for "alternative action" ? Not using "blueZ' is NOT an option - it is stuck "as is " in Linux kernel ... Cheers
Member 14968771 wrote:
Any suggestions for "alternative action" ?
Go outside, face into the wind, and start to pee. It will accomplish roughly the same thing.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment "Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst "I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
-
here is "an official" web site " BlueZ[^] After months of " futzing " around with different versions of "official Linux Bluetooth stack " - "blueZ" library and its lack of documentation / follow -up / support I like to do what is customary POST A REVIEW addressed to the original company who sponsored (?) this abortion of so called software I do realize they can fire me stop me from participating in any forums post canned letter about how wonderful service they provide let AI ask "need more information..." or simply ignore me Any suggestions for "alternative action" ? Not using "blueZ' is NOT an option - it is stuck "as is " in Linux kernel ... Cheers
This is the fundamental problem with FOSS. You get what you pay for. While open source is great to ensure trustworthiness of a product, using something you don't pay for means costs will always be cut. And it's usually on the support side of things.
Jeremy Falcon
-
This is the fundamental problem with FOSS. You get what you pay for. While open source is great to ensure trustworthiness of a product, using something you don't pay for means costs will always be cut. And it's usually on the support side of things.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And it's usually on the support side of things.
Friend of mine, decades ago: "But that's the beauty of open source: if it doesn't do what you want it to do, you can fix it yourself!!!" Me: I already have my plate full, maintaining my own software; why should I take it upon myself to fix other people's broken software on top of that?" Him: You just don't get it...You *could*, if you *wanted* to. Me: That's not much of an argument, I *wouldn't*, whether it's closed source or open source. Fix your sh*t.
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And it's usually on the support side of things.
Friend of mine, decades ago: "But that's the beauty of open source: if it doesn't do what you want it to do, you can fix it yourself!!!" Me: I already have my plate full, maintaining my own software; why should I take it upon myself to fix other people's broken software on top of that?" Him: You just don't get it...You *could*, if you *wanted* to. Me: That's not much of an argument, I *wouldn't*, whether it's closed source or open source. Fix your sh*t.
dandy72 wrote:
I already have my plate full, maintaining my own software; why should I take it upon myself to fix other people's broken software on top of that?
Err...except of course you don't need to write it from scratch in the first place. You know the same condition that follows from the "plate full".
-
This is the fundamental problem with FOSS. You get what you pay for. While open source is great to ensure trustworthiness of a product, using something you don't pay for means costs will always be cut. And it's usually on the support side of things.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
While open source is great to ensure trustworthiness of a product
Is it? Sure, it sounds great in theory, and sure, anyone can examine the code for bugs and security issues, but how many actually do? And of those few people how many have the knowledge and skills to recognize an obscure security issue if they saw one? Do they also go through the code of all the FOSS npm packages the product incorporates? I'm skeptical.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
- Thomas SowellA day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes) -
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
While open source is great to ensure trustworthiness of a product
Is it? Sure, it sounds great in theory, and sure, anyone can examine the code for bugs and security issues, but how many actually do? And of those few people how many have the knowledge and skills to recognize an obscure security issue if they saw one? Do they also go through the code of all the FOSS npm packages the product incorporates? I'm skeptical.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
- Thomas SowellA day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)It's pretty obvious I mean in comparison to closed source. :suss:
Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And it's usually on the support side of things.
Friend of mine, decades ago: "But that's the beauty of open source: if it doesn't do what you want it to do, you can fix it yourself!!!" Me: I already have my plate full, maintaining my own software; why should I take it upon myself to fix other people's broken software on top of that?" Him: You just don't get it...You *could*, if you *wanted* to. Me: That's not much of an argument, I *wouldn't*, whether it's closed source or open source. Fix your sh*t.
That's not the point I'm making. The discussion was centered around support. Now, to the point you're making not related to my point... Some people want to tinker. Some people value their time. I didn't say being able to tinker is bad. I said FOSS generally has no real support.
Jeremy Falcon
-
It's pretty obvious I mean in comparison to closed source. :suss:
Jeremy Falcon
I gather nobody will say "yes, publish your review..." mainly because the subject changed to "open source" ..... Also if I publish the review I AM NOT FIXING anything , just trying to put the authors on top of "hall of shame " ....maybe it will get their attention and THEY WILL fix it.... ...I am just being naive...
-
That's not the point I'm making. The discussion was centered around support. Now, to the point you're making not related to my point... Some people want to tinker. Some people value their time. I didn't say being able to tinker is bad. I said FOSS generally has no real support.
Jeremy Falcon