A software license doesn’t make software good.
-
A software license doesn’t make software good.
Open source code written by a bunch of sexist, racist, ableist assholes is no viable alternative.
Free, libre, open source code is good when:
- there are design docs
- there are risk assessments
- there is user research
- accessibility is a requirement from the beginning
- it is private by design
- documentation is a part of every release
All of this is enabled by teams with a code of conduct, and no tolerance for assholes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
- When people are paid
I can not emphasise how many problems come from having a one way flow from workers to users and absolutely no flow back to workers. It makes so many other problems so much harder to help fix.
-
@akareilly Given that the vast majority of open-source projects are not accessible and developers don't care…
@menelion I have a tiny amount of hope that accessibility becomes a requirement for any EU-funded “digital sovereignty” projects. Given my experience being harassed at FOSDEM for using an evil corporate OS because I needed working speech to text, I don’t think developers will do this voluntarily. This is fine for single contributor and single user hobby projects, but for everything else, what little accessibility we have for interacting with public organisations must not be yanked out from under us. Not holding my breath though.
-
A software license doesn’t make software good.
Open source code written by a bunch of sexist, racist, ableist assholes is no viable alternative.
Free, libre, open source code is good when:
- there are design docs
- there are risk assessments
- there is user research
- accessibility is a requirement from the beginning
- it is private by design
- documentation is a part of every release
All of this is enabled by teams with a code of conduct, and no tolerance for assholes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
No, of course I am not posting about the code you write for yourself only.
If you reply like this, you’re basically doing the FLOSS equivalent of commenting on a video about making bean soup with “But I don’t like beans! Post a soup recipe without beans!”
If you have end users, make good software.
-
@menelion I have a tiny amount of hope that accessibility becomes a requirement for any EU-funded “digital sovereignty” projects. Given my experience being harassed at FOSDEM for using an evil corporate OS because I needed working speech to text, I don’t think developers will do this voluntarily. This is fine for single contributor and single user hobby projects, but for everything else, what little accessibility we have for interacting with public organisations must not be yanked out from under us. Not holding my breath though.
@akareilly You know the keyword here? Harassed. HARASSED, sorry for yelling. sorry again, but I was never harassed by any Microsoft, Google or Apple employee when I told them I need accessibility. At least it was awkward silence, and at most (and quite often, I admit) my reports were passed to the appropriate engineers and most often acted upon (Microsoft is the best here, Apple and google not so much with Apple being the worst, at least from my experience). With open-source though, there are very rare devs who really want to help (I don't claim they don't exist, it would be just ungrateful to those who care). However most of them, especially in desktop world, just don't care, and the most is "submit a PR, I'll look at it". #Accessibility
-
A software license doesn’t make software good.
Open source code written by a bunch of sexist, racist, ableist assholes is no viable alternative.
Free, libre, open source code is good when:
- there are design docs
- there are risk assessments
- there is user research
- accessibility is a requirement from the beginning
- it is private by design
- documentation is a part of every release
All of this is enabled by teams with a code of conduct, and no tolerance for assholes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
Licensing is a necessary but not sufficient requirement, indeed. Governance and usability requirements are also necessary. -
@akareilly You know the keyword here? Harassed. HARASSED, sorry for yelling. sorry again, but I was never harassed by any Microsoft, Google or Apple employee when I told them I need accessibility. At least it was awkward silence, and at most (and quite often, I admit) my reports were passed to the appropriate engineers and most often acted upon (Microsoft is the best here, Apple and google not so much with Apple being the worst, at least from my experience). With open-source though, there are very rare devs who really want to help (I don't claim they don't exist, it would be just ungrateful to those who care). However most of them, especially in desktop world, just don't care, and the most is "submit a PR, I'll look at it". #Accessibility
@menelion Plus it was one of the milder incidents of harassment that have happened in open source communities. The bar is in hell.
-
No, of course I am not posting about the code you write for yourself only.
If you reply like this, you’re basically doing the FLOSS equivalent of commenting on a video about making bean soup with “But I don’t like beans! Post a soup recipe without beans!”
If you have end users, make good software.
If you want to restore a Trabant and cover it with spikes and install a seat that shocks you, and you drive it on a closed track at your house, you do you.
If you’re on the road with the rest of us, maybe don’t.
Don’t try to make battle BDSM Trabi the default either.
This post is also about FLOSS.
-
No, of course I am not posting about the code you write for yourself only.
If you reply like this, you’re basically doing the FLOSS equivalent of commenting on a video about making bean soup with “But I don’t like beans! Post a soup recipe without beans!”
If you have end users, make good software.
@akareilly what if end users start using code I wrote for myself?
There is no design docs, no risk assessments, no user research, no a11y, not private by design, no documentation.
I am not in control of my end users. Most of my code is provided "as is", without warranty of any kind, express or implied.
At what point am I responsible of my end users?
-
@menelion I have a tiny amount of hope that accessibility becomes a requirement for any EU-funded “digital sovereignty” projects. Given my experience being harassed at FOSDEM for using an evil corporate OS because I needed working speech to text, I don’t think developers will do this voluntarily. This is fine for single contributor and single user hobby projects, but for everything else, what little accessibility we have for interacting with public organisations must not be yanked out from under us. Not holding my breath though.
@akareilly @menelion Eu-funded would be perfect!
-
@bitflipped @akareilly I tend to agree for single-author projects, but I think people in FOSS use this as an excuse for bad behavior and/or for dismissing accessibility.
There are plenty of NGOs where volunteers will be shown the door if they break the code of conduct or don't care about specific requirements. This view of volunteer work where you just do what you like is strangely specific to FOSS.
@fvsch @bitflipped @akareilly
When you give away old furniture on craigslist for free, do you provide free shipping, warranty, and 24/7 customer service?Do you go to artists who give away their paintings for free and demand changes because you dislike their work?
Open-source solo devs already have a problem with burn-out today. Remember, we do this unpaid in our own free time, as a hobby.
You're free to submit patches for the issues you discover. Be the change you'd like to see in the world.
-
@fvsch @bitflipped @akareilly
When you give away old furniture on craigslist for free, do you provide free shipping, warranty, and 24/7 customer service?Do you go to artists who give away their paintings for free and demand changes because you dislike their work?
Open-source solo devs already have a problem with burn-out today. Remember, we do this unpaid in our own free time, as a hobby.
You're free to submit patches for the issues you discover. Be the change you'd like to see in the world.
@fvsch @bitflipped @akareilly (ofc it's an entirely different story for commercial projects or shareware aka "open core")
-
@fvsch @bitflipped @akareilly
When you give away old furniture on craigslist for free, do you provide free shipping, warranty, and 24/7 customer service?Do you go to artists who give away their paintings for free and demand changes because you dislike their work?
Open-source solo devs already have a problem with burn-out today. Remember, we do this unpaid in our own free time, as a hobby.
You're free to submit patches for the issues you discover. Be the change you'd like to see in the world.
My posts are not about hobby projects.
Per my previous post in this thread.
-
A software license doesn’t make software good.
Open source code written by a bunch of sexist, racist, ableist assholes is no viable alternative.
Free, libre, open source code is good when:
- there are design docs
- there are risk assessments
- there is user research
- accessibility is a requirement from the beginning
- it is private by design
- documentation is a part of every release
All of this is enabled by teams with a code of conduct, and no tolerance for assholes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
@akareilly *cough cough* Lemmy
-
My posts are not about hobby projects.
Per my previous post in this thread.
> This view of volunteer work where you just do what you like is strangely specific to FOSS.
That's something I take issue with.
There's nothing strange about using your unpaid, free time to "do what you like"Whether as individual or as a group, as long as you're developing for free, in your own free time, no one has the right to demand anything.
-
A software license doesn’t make software good.
Open source code written by a bunch of sexist, racist, ableist assholes is no viable alternative.
Free, libre, open source code is good when:
- there are design docs
- there are risk assessments
- there is user research
- accessibility is a requirement from the beginning
- it is private by design
- documentation is a part of every release
All of this is enabled by teams with a code of conduct, and no tolerance for assholes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
@akareilly I'd rather be called a stupid fucking idiot by the maintainer for asking a dumb question.
With a CoC you constantly have to decipher patronizing, passive aggressive responses to know where you are.
That's just me, of course. People who love gossip and talking behind someone's back feel right at home, I'd wager. -
> This view of volunteer work where you just do what you like is strangely specific to FOSS.
That's something I take issue with.
There's nothing strange about using your unpaid, free time to "do what you like"Whether as individual or as a group, as long as you're developing for free, in your own free time, no one has the right to demand anything.
@justjanne There are several cases where it’s not OK to just do what you like because you’re not getting paid.
When:
a FLOSS project has all unpaid contributors (an effective way to shut out people without the socioeconomic status to work for free)
And:
Solicits end users
Then:
There is a responsibility to make security and usability a part of the project planning.
Again, I was not posting about a solo contributor solo user project.
-
- When people are paid
I can not emphasise how many problems come from having a one way flow from workers to users and absolutely no flow back to workers. It makes so many other problems so much harder to help fix.
@doctormo Being able to offer free labour is a privilege that does not get acknowledged nearly enough.
If participation in FLOSS requires volunteering, a project might as well hang a “generational wealth or other forms of socioeconomic luck required” sign.
-
@doctormo Being able to offer free labour is a privilege that does not get acknowledged nearly enough.
If participation in FLOSS requires volunteering, a project might as well hang a “generational wealth or other forms of socioeconomic luck required” sign.
Yep. Not only does that narrow the cultures participants are capable of coming from; it also weakens the very notion that users should be listened to at all.
It's not just money that flows to workers, it's also user's needs and wants. And not just work can flow to users, but also care and service.
-
A software license doesn’t make software good.
Open source code written by a bunch of sexist, racist, ableist assholes is no viable alternative.
Free, libre, open source code is good when:
- there are design docs
- there are risk assessments
- there is user research
- accessibility is a requirement from the beginning
- it is private by design
- documentation is a part of every release
All of this is enabled by teams with a code of conduct, and no tolerance for assholes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
@akareilly Um... those things are orthogonal to someone making a FOSS project in their spare time...
> Diversity, equity, and inclusion is the key to all of the goals FLOSS projects claim to share.
Is it in the LICENSE? Then no, it's just stuff you cherish. The people doing the work on the project may not care about them as much as you do, and that's fine.
-
@justjanne There are several cases where it’s not OK to just do what you like because you’re not getting paid.
When:
a FLOSS project has all unpaid contributors (an effective way to shut out people without the socioeconomic status to work for free)
And:
Solicits end users
Then:
There is a responsibility to make security and usability a part of the project planning.
Again, I was not posting about a solo contributor solo user project.
@akareilly Let me be frank here:
It doesn't matter if it's one person or twenty, software or an IRL project, an artists' CC0 photographs or free furniture on craigslist.
People give away objects and labor for free because they enjoy it. You can take what they provide, or you can reject it. But you cannot force them to do or give what you'd like instead.
You can offer rewards such as bug bounties or fame (e.g. publicly awarding "accessible project of the month"), but you cannot set demands.
