That seems like a poor attitude imo.

Why do you believe that forcing something onto everyone around you is justifiable? I mean, if what you're pushing is half as good as what you're claiming it to be, wouldn't you be seeing people lining up to jump on the bandwagon?

It's strange how people push tools not based on technical merits and technological traits, but on fads and peer pressure.

It’s not that Microsoft isn’t allowed to use ffmpeg, it’s that they start demanding quick service.

I'm not sure what experience you have in maintaining any somewhat popular FLOSS project, but as I said in other posts the way random users demand features and fixes in these circles already became a meme in FLOSS circles. We're talking about insults and belligerent attitudes towards whole projects in abstract and maintainers in particular, to the point maintainers end up burning out and quitting.

Knowing this, complaining that a particular request was described as high-priority as if this was unacceptable, fully knowing that this doesn't even represent a remark that's out of line given the baseline, is something that makes no sense at all. It sounds as an lame attempt to be outraged about something.

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.

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?

Microsoft have every right to fix the bug themselves and the maintainer has every right not to.

Yes, it does. You do too, and so do I.

Does it make sense to you for me to attack you for this?

And how about any person submitting a bug report? Is it ok to pile up on them for not fixing it themselves?

If you change the names, is your attitude any different? If it is, then you have a problem on your hands, and it's a personal problem.

There’s a difference between creating something and giving it to the world and being on the hook to help them solve their business problems.

I think you're extrapolating things that aren't there. If you had any experience contributing to any semi-successful floss project you'd be ver aware that asking for fixes is as common as filing bug reports. This is not a Microsoft problem, it's a staple of FLOSS project management.

Why do you think it's reasonable to single out a whole company for doing exactly what the community contribution process was designed to be and achieve? On any case you see FLOSS proponents arguing that filing bug reports and troubleshooting problems counts as contributions to improve a project. Yet, here we are attacking someone for doing just that, because of what exactly? Do you think ffmpeg would be in a better shape if the likes of Microsoft didn't reported bugs?

Completely disagree. This is how it works, Microsoft get software for free but they have no authority to prioritise other people’s scheduling

I don't know where you're getting the prioritization issue. Anyone in the world who is able to create an issue in a bug tracker can claim anything, but it's always the people doing the bug triages who determine priorities. It means exactly as it means: nothing.

The "is this fixed yet" posts in bug reports by now is a meme in the floss world.

I think you're trying too hard to find something to be outraged over.

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.

In fact a reasonable compromise is possible: rust is perfectly capable of interoperating with the C languages.

I doubt you work on software for a living, because not only are you arguing a problem in a desperate need for a solution but also no one in their right mind would think it is a good idea to double the tech stacks and development environments and pipelines and everything, and with that greatly increase the cognitive load require to develop even the simplest features, just to... For what exactly? What exactly is your value proposition, and what tradeoffs, if any, you took into account?

You are free to do whatever you feel like doing in your pet projects. Rewrite them in as many languages you feel like using. In professional settings where managers have to hire people and have time and cash budgets and have to show bugs and features being finished, this sort of nonsense doesn't fly.

That sounds like a solution in desperate need for a problem.

It's ok if you never did any professional software development work. Those who do have to go through these workflows on a daily basis. Some people don't even understand why version control systems are used or useful, and that is perfectly ok. Those who do work have to understand how to use their tools, and those who don't can go about their life without even bothering with this stuff.

I would rarely hear about Dlang in my circles and bubbles.

That's hardly a measure of relevance or technical merit. There's a lot of artificial hype being created around some new projects that have a very tenuous correspondence to their technical merits or problems they actually solve, and social network chatter is hardly a factor in assessing technical merits.