[Update: Brian Ganninger of Growl and Adium fame has posted on his strong disagreement with the HandBrake manifesto.]Since HandBrake got back under one open-source roof, the attention to everyone's favorite Mac DVD 'archiving' tool has heated up, and with said attention the volume of end-user feature requests has apparently risen. Over at the HandBrake forums, back on March 6, Rodney posted a manifesto called "HandBrake and Open Source - an end-user must-read," pointing out what he sees as the differences between F/OSS and commercial software when it comes to user-driven feature priorities. I quote:
"Open source software is exactly what it sounds like: It's software written by a (usually small) group of highly-dedicated people that solved particular problems they themselves had and thought others might find useful as well. Like most things that are free, it comes with no warranty: If it does what you want, that's great - that's exactly why it was offered to you. If not, you have the freedom of choice to either modify it to suit your desires or find another software package that more closely meets your needs."
The core of Rodney's message, as I read it: if you want something weird or customized, either pay someone for it or code it yourself -- don't knock on the glass with your crazy "why doesn't HandBrake do X?" requests, unless you're willing to pull your weight, 'cause everyone here is a volunteer. I don't agree with him on all fronts -- certainly, 'big kahuna' open source projects like Firefox, Webkit or OpenOffice are highly focused on the needs of the end user -- but for apps like HandBrake with a small core of developers, it definitely pays to ask very politely if there's something you desire, and to accept the fact that your priorities may not sync up with the developers' areas of interest. Now, off to learn C -- where did I leave that copy of Kernighan and Ritchie?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-24-2007 @ 1:30PM
Chris said...
Rodney's message was arrogant, incorrect, and borderline offensive to the open source community. I'm going to avoid using and recommending handbrake in the future because of it.
Reply
3-24-2007 @ 3:21PM
Stunned Silence said...
What a horrid representation of OSS. I've posted a response here: http://www.infinitenexus.com/blog/?p=61
Reply
3-24-2007 @ 3:52PM
Michael Rose said...
Chris, Bryan, thanks for your feedback. On rereading my post it's clear that I didn't acknowledge the diversity of opinion in the community, and obviously many people feel strongly that the 'HandBrake manifesto' is wrongheaded and arrogantly composed.
My intent was to remind the user community that there are real people on the other side of these wonderful applications we depend on, and that a little bit of civility and grace (and thanks!) are appropriate; rhester's frustration is real, and however harshly it's expressed, those of us who want to cooperate with or leverage the HandBrake project will need to acknowledge it and try to move past it.
I've added a link to Brian's response to the top of the main post so that readers may have the benefit of a cogent alternative position.
--Mike @ tuaw
Reply
3-25-2007 @ 12:15AM
Mike said...
maybe mediafork should have stayed forked.
Reply
3-25-2007 @ 1:31PM
JeffDM said...
It's right and it's not, as in factually correct but the tone was not, I see it as a tone of frustration. No program can be everything to everyone. The article also acknowledges that it's difficult to learn how to program, it usually takes a significant amount of skill to expand on an existing project.
I can't help but wonder if the Handbrake developer had burned out because of too many requests. I am skeptical of the replaceability part, with this program at least, given how long it took to fork.
A better program does consider the users because programmers don't represent the typical skills of the average user, but unfortunately, the tendency of the typical OSS program is to program for themselves and I don't think we should kid ourselves and pretend that this doesn't happen.
Reply