this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
31 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

17394 readers
757 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Microsoft employee:

Hi, This is a high priority ticket and the FFmpeg version is currently used in a highly visible product in Microsoft. We have customers experience issues with Caption during Teams Live Event. Please help

Maintainer's comment on twitter:

After politely requesting a support contract from Microsoft for long term maintenance, they offered a one-time payment of a few thousand dollars instead.

This is unacceptable.

And further:

The lesson from the xz fiasco is that investments in maintenance and sustainability are unsexy and probably won't get a middle manager their promotion but pay off a thousandfold over many years.

But try selling that to a bean counter

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheMightyHUG@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Can someone enlighten me why a one-time payment of a few thousand for a bugfix is unacceptable? I feel like I'm missing something.

[–] BaskinRobbins@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I think the maintainer just viewed the bug report as tone deaf. Microsoft is a trillion dollar company and apparently relying on this library without a support contract. Then they a open a high priority bug item. The maintainer saying it's unacceptable is them basically saying they won't prioritize any work unless there's an existing support contract and that they don't do one off payments for bug fixes, which I think is fair.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago (4 children)

I think the maintainer just viewed the bug report as tone deaf. Microsoft is a trillion dollar company and apparently relying on this library without a support contract.

I think this mentality shows a clear dissonance between how maintainers are licensing their software and what are their expectations in terms of retribution from users of their software.

If they release a software package with a license that explicitly states that they allow the whole world to use it freely without any expectation if return, they cannot complain afterwards that some particular people in the world end up using it.

Likewise for bug reports.

If they want to get paid because the software they have been releasing to be used freely by everyone is being used freely by a specific company then they need to get their shit together and release it under a license where they explicitly state their terms. This is crítical for everyone involved, specially end users, because we need clarity on these terms.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Imagine if you gave away some old clothes to some Charity and they called you and said "Some of the socks have holes in them and we need you to come over here and fix those holes ASAP because we want to sell them in our used clothes store". What would be your reaction to that?

The expectation of payment is not for the software (which MS already has and is already using, free of charge, same as everybody else), it's for getting priority in bugfix and maintenance work, or in other words, it's for dictating other people's work rather than merelly getting the product of work they, of their own choice and in their own timings, did and gave away for free.

Free software is a social relationship, not a business relationship: the users get what they get because somebody chose to put their own time into it and is giving it out for free. Such relationship does not entitle the recipients of the goodwill of others to make demands on their time, especially if said recipients are actually profiting from what those other people gave away. If they want the right to get to use other people's time as they see fit, then they have to get into a business relationship and that's only going to happen in business terms that both parties are willing to have.

Further, nobody is stopping MS from using their own programmers to fix that problem themselves.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Imagine if you gave away some old clothes to some Charity and they called you and said “Some of the socks have holes in them and we need you to come over here and fix those holes ASAP because we want to sell them in our used clothes store”. What would be your reaction to that?

I think your hypothetical scenario doesn't match the issue being discussed in a few key aspects.

You're giving old clothes with no expectation of return. Why then get pissed because someone is using your clothes without paying you for them?

Then,if you make it your point to put up a system for everyone to file tickets pointing problems with the clothes you're giving away, why are you whining that the system is being used as it was designed to be used?

It's perfectly fine if you feel the need to prioritize your work based on your criteria alone, and anyone else's input is at most a suggestion. That's what everyone expects of it, too. But don't throw a tantrum when someone uses your work precisely as you told the world to use it.

[–] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't think you are able to grok the actual issue, which is a big corp demanding free work, then demanding a pittance to complete the work, then being buthurt when people refuse to work with them.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So is the real analogy …

You gave some old clothes to charity, expecting nothing back. However you spotted a lawyer wearing your old clothes so walked up and demanded money?

[–] bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

No no no lawyer came knocking at my door begging me to darn a sock

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The point of my comment seems to have missed you, turned around and done another pass and missed you again.

[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think the ffmpeg maintainer is complaining that Microsoft is using ffmpeg, rather that they are opening "high priority" bug reports based on customer complaints. This might be a high priority problem for Microsoft but that does not make it so for ffmpeg.

The license allows Microsoft to use ffmpeg but they aren't entitled to demand free labor from the project. Really, no one is entitled to do so, but Microsoft being a large company who can definitely afford to put money or talent on the problem makes it only that much more egregious.

edit: I would note that asking for help or reporting a bug is usually welcome, the problematic part is demanding help because it's a high priority issue for YOUR customers.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think the ffmpeg maintainer is complaining that Microsoft is using ffmpeg, rather that they are opening “high priority” bug reports based on customer complaints.

Users can only assign priority to issues they create themselves if they are explicitly authorized to assign priorities.

If you provide access to that field but then complain that bug reporters use that field, you're complaining about how you misconfigured your service, not how end users are using it.

Are there any other people targeted in this sort of complain, or is a specific company being singled out just because some low-level grunt filled in a field in a bug report?

[–] otl@apubtest2.srcbeat.com 1 points 7 months ago

or is a specific company being singled out just because some low-level grunt filled in a field in a bug report?

FYI they're not a "low-level grunt". The bug author's job title is Principal Software Engineer at Microsoft with (at least) 18 years' experience.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The problem isnt that ms was using it The problem is that ms wanted special treatment for free because of their timetable, which wasnt even 'oh shit everything broke' but for a fucking product launch as if the maintainers should care about that, treating a fucking charity like a contractor, and really highlighting how all this proprietary bullshit can only exist because of the work provided by open source people.

Microsoft needs to see serious consequences from the open source community for this.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

special treatment for free

They filed a bug report, with a reproducible bug.

Some guides on how to contribute to FLOSS projects even go as far as listing this as one of the main ways to contribute to projects.

But here you are, describing a run-of-the-mill bug report, filed among hundreds of bug reports, in a ticketing system explicitly opened to the public so that everyone and anyone in the world could file bug reports, as a request for "special treatment for free".

Do you think every single person filing a bug report is asking to be given special treatment for free? Everyone's bug is very important to them too. What makes you think this case is special or even any different?

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The report of the bug is not the problem. The prioritization, reasoning for the prioritization, and demand that it be fixed quickly for their product launch was the problem.

The fact that when asked, they offered pay for a spot fix rather than maintenance, essentially abusing the Commons for corporate profit, and being super fucking rude about it, was the problem.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The report of the bug is not the problem.

People in this thread are arguing otherwise.

The prioritization, (...)

Users filing tickets do not prioritize jack shit. That's not how it works. At best they mention an issue is important to them. Not even in big corporations dealing with internal tickets things work like that. The responsibility of prioritizing work lies on the project owners, exclusively.

and demand that it be fixed quickly (...

Literally what each and every single user affected by a problem asks in their bug reports.

Again, why do you feel this is something that warrants your outrage?

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

people in this thread are arguing otherwise

Okay so talk to one of them about it. I'm with you on this part. So bizzaire.

[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The maintainer is a human that needs to eat every day, and not just whenever their services are needed. So at least, the sum of money would need to be a few times higher than whatever labour the fix takes.

But then, the maintainer's ability to fix these bugs doesn't come from nowhere. They worked on this project for likely a long time, which would also need to be taken into account when agreeing on a sum.

Further, this would be business to business. And those contracts often include the value that the client gets out of the software. So if Microsoft makes billions from this open source library, then the maintainer's - as a business - should receive a payment that reflects this for the fix.

All that implies that a few thousand is not nearly enough. Maybe 100k and the maintainer would budge.

[–] lysdexic@programming.dev -1 points 7 months ago

The maintainer is a human that needs to eat every day, and not just whenever their services are needed.

That's perfectly fine.

But the maintainer is indeed explicitly making his work available to the public for free and without any expectation of retribution of any kind, isn't it?

And this isn't exactly something new or recent or novel, right? That's been going on for many years.

What changed? Did anything changed at all, even?