lysdexic

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.