this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
1207 points (97.9% liked)
Open Source
31359 readers
222 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
While we're at it, I love that you let me customize the settings via a config, but for the love of god make the default config the best it can possibly be
This. It should be the most sane configuration and fit most use cases and lead to an experience working out of the box.
I contribute to OS projects and work on one full time. EVERYBODY thinks that their obscure use case is the most common (not saying this is what you are doing).
We get users that are completely flabbergasted that our software doesn't offer some feature that is totally specific to their industry and has never been requested even once by anyone else previously. We'll show them our feature request form on our site where you can also view and upvote other requests, and point out that the feature they want has never been requested. They will literally come up with some bs excuse why that is and then insist that we get on it and build out this custom functionality that they need or else they're going to slander us on social media.
I understand the developer POV too. It's clear that getting the right config for most use cases is a UX problem, which may involve user studies, telemetry to be setup. Perhaps out of scope for most small scale individual projects.
Additionally, I also fully understand that many, if not most of these projects are hobby projects and expectations from users should align with the scope of the project and the resources committed. It's so easy to feel entitled and deserving of high quality projects but they are so time consuming.
My comments were not for those projects but rather mature ones. And contributing to the projects is often the most appreciated way when proposing changes.
In all cases, for any free project, it is always acceptable to answer that something is out of scope, that resources don't allow for the feature to be implemented or that additional help on implementing it are welcome.
People demanding something in exchange for nothing are obviously not the most welcome users :)
There's a real problem here with backwards compatibility. If you add an option for something, it makes sense to make the default match the functionality of old versions, even if it's not the best for general use cases. That way any tools built on top of it can safely update.
Ding ding ding!
That said, the solution is to set new defaults for new installations only and not change existing configs. Users lose their minds (rightfully so) if you modify their existing configs.
I prefer the simple, sane defaults that work for everyone with a heavily commented config file giving detailed information on what each value for each option does, personally. Like MPV's config file.
I haven't even touched MPVs config file because I just assumed it would be empty like so much other software I use. Looks like I know what I'm doing tonight.
Krita and not having hotkeys ಠ_ಠ