Toxic developers turned me off Home Assistant. The same developer is the star of this issue: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/126326
Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27505277
Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27505277
It's not a good look taken together
Which option will minimize the feelings of betrayal and violation: making this feature opt-in or opt-out?
Any level of understanding of humans will produce the right answer.
As someone whose smart home need is minimal -- I just use it to turn on/off lights with voice -- I'd rather have nothing than support such behavior.
Is there anything wrong with (not) going with a solution based on your personal belief?
You are free to make your own decision.
His judgement is so poor we simply can't trust him to make correct decisions about the software he is building, there are doubtless other security issues.
> As the author of the package that is being re-packaged here. I'm against it being repacked into here. > While licensing wise I cannot stop you, I do hope you can honor my request.
Maintainers have to make decisions about how to handle support burden, and these decisions are completely outside the scope or purview of any license. People who have never been in that position may have a hard time understanding it, but the NixOS maintainers absolutely do understand and that is demonstrated in that thread.
Who says so?
If it's not in legal text, it doesn't exist, or matters.
If you don't want to support it, make it clear in license or README. Lots of projects work like that. Companies put "source available" or "open source but no external contribution" projects on GitHub and make it very clear what's the expectation. Nobody has any issue about that.
Somehow this guy thinks he is special.
If someone doesn't understand how licenses work, they should keep their work close sourced.
He acknowledged from the very beginning that the usage is licensed. Licenses aren't involved in the ask.
If you want a legal basis for this right, I suppose it would be GitHub's terms of service, with which his comments appear to be in compliance.
In terms of what is on-topic in this thread, he can state his terms for providing free, unlicensed support wherever he wants. He made it clear he wants nothing to do with support of this library in NixOS, in the place where it was most relevant to mention that.