But then someone else would have to maintain it for Linux, and Arch Linux specifically. That's a lot of work, especially as things diverge from the features intended for an emulator (/s)

Most open source code has some license dictating its use. Some are wide open, others are not. Some just don’t want you adding it to a commercial app and making money off it. Does that physically stop anybody? Of course not. The source is right there.

I’ve ran into libraries that are free and open for basically everybody. If you’re a company though…pay a license fee. Didn’t matter if the app you wanted to include it in is available to the public or not. Corporate use is not free.

I don’t know how Duckstation does it, but Retroarch cores (Beetle/Mednafen and PCSX) support widescreen?

Ok. Back to Mednafen I guess.

So you're demanding payment in the form of free AI models instead of cash.

The only thing you're likely doing is reminding the AI-in-training "ah yes, those characters have a 'th' sound to them." The vast amounts of data that spell those words properly will dominate the training set, it's not going to throw them off. Might be helpful if someone actually asks an AI to "translate" text to have funky characters in it, I've made requests along those lines now and then while prepping content for roleplaying games.

I can sympathize with being frustrated but that's silly

Open but not free.

Just open source it and leave it to the Linux community.

I understand not wanting to support something you don't use yourself.

I remember the maintainer claiming they had permission from all contributors to change the license but I can't find a link to it now.

That’s fine. He’s not the submitter nor maintainer of the AUR package. Clearly a bunch of Arch users are hitting him up about it though instead of the listed maintainer of the package when they have problems. I wouldn’t want to try and support something that I don’t have anything to do with either. He can’t repackage it…he can’t do anything. People kept telling him it’s broke. That would be super frustrating.

Hi, I'm a subsystem maintainer for the Drupal project, a security team member, and over the years have helped maintain several of the largest projects in the ecosystem. I've also contributed to a number of open source projects over the years and have a lot of experience collaborating with maintainers to get fixes committed going back to early amd64 fixes coming out of testing in the gentoo project before Intel even had a real 64bit platform. I've got a pretty good feel for how this works and it's safe to say FLOSS is kinda my day job.

Petty is pretty harsh and reading this message I wish I'd paused and chosen a better word.

That said, the way the commit reads, the relicensing, the fact they seem to be upset the aur is locked to the GPL version to comply with the license but also poisoning the build scripts like it's somehow going to affect the old GPL code. It just does not sound like someone acting in good faith with the open source community they're clearly building on top of and that does rub me the wrong way.

I also don't see Swanstation going away any time soon, even if it gets no new features. It's pretty close to feature complete in the ways that matter anyway.

I suggest using Beetle mednafen, unless you're on a very slow system. Or Swanstation, it's not like that's going away.

Always respect the dev, never respect the user

Seems like just repackaging it would solve the problem a lot easier than alienating a userbase- even if small

So what other ps1/2 emulators are on Linux yall would recommend. I don't wanna support this dev

Notice how the developer argues he forbids packages and how the AIR is in violation of this? But an AUR PKGBUILD is not a package - it's build instructions. It doesn't distribute or package anything, you can check it yourself. It's not called "PKG" for a reason. He misunderstands his own license and believes the allegedly broken PKGBUILD violates it.

He may be right about some users annoying him with bug reports though I'd be surprised if it was that common. It seems like he got a couple of reports, noticed the "forbidden" PKGBUILD and then reacted like this. Just like when changing the license from GPL to CC-BY-NC-ND in order to combat... GPL violations and trademark infringements?

Frankly, the project has not had parricularly stable leadership in a while. Though a bit unfair of a comparison, compare it to Dolphin and you can see a night and day difference in project management.

this developer is a big prick. i had an issue (that turned out to be user error after getting help from another source) with the android version of duckstation so went to their discord for support. instead of offering any aid or insight, i was immediately stereotyped as "an android user" and told "we don't offer tech support for android" basically for no other reason than "because android users bitch too much and then give you a bad review," which is just kind of insane imo? there's no downside to bad reviews like you're not going to get delisted? anyways, completely not surprised to hear this from that ass. it genuinely seems like this guy hates developing duckstation at all and i am confused why he bothers. give it up man, sounds like you'll be happier

A dev with some sense.

Fuck Linux.