this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024

1068 points (96.0% liked)

Programming

17511 readers

23 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1068

Microsoft opens a "high priority" bug ticket in ffmpeg, attempting to leech the free labour of the maintainers (trac.ffmpeg.org)

submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

227 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Microsoft employee:

Hi, This is a high priority ticket and the FFmpeg version is currently used in a highly visible product in Microsoft. We have customers experience issues with Caption during Teams Live Event. Please help

Maintainer's comment on twitter:

After politely requesting a support contract from Microsoft for long term maintenance, they offered a one-time payment of a few thousand dollars instead.

This is unacceptable.

And further:

The lesson from the xz fiasco is that investments in maintenance and sustainability are unsexy and probably won't get a middle manager their promotion but pay off a thousandfold over many years.

But try selling that to a bean counter

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 56 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Old issue, so why post it now make it sound like MS demands something?

Opened 11 months ago Last modified 11 months ago

It's a regression, so ffmpeg should fix a regression.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago

See https://sopuli.xyz/comment/8474008

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 58 points 7 months ago (5 children)

I love how that PM brings up the fact that this is needed for a product launch. Like who cares?

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 76 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Maybe microsoft should try reinstalling windows.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 7 months ago

Have they turned it off and on again?

[–] [email protected] 71 points 7 months ago (11 children)

Can someone enlighten me why a one-time payment of a few thousand for a bugfix is unacceptable? I feel like I'm missing something.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Companies hate giving out cash. Even if it's for software they critically need.

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago

Long term maintenance. Meaning not a simple bug fix but providing support on demand and possibly prioritizing requests by the contract grantor for an extended period.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The maintainer is a human that needs to eat every day, and not just whenever their services are needed. So at least, the sum of money would need to be a few times higher than whatever labour the fix takes.

But then, the maintainer's ability to fix these bugs doesn't come from nowhere. They worked on this project for likely a long time, which would also need to be taken into account when agreeing on a sum.

Further, this would be business to business. And those contracts often include the value that the client gets out of the software. So if Microsoft makes billions from this open source library, then the maintainer's - as a business - should receive a payment that reflects this for the fix.

All that implies that a few thousand is not nearly enough. Maybe 100k and the maintainer would budge.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 44 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A trillion dollar company using your product in one of their flagship products without a support contract can fuck right off.

Microsoft should be putting up money via the support contract to support the creators in maintaining and further development of their product.

A one off payment might be technically sufficient, it is not ethically or morally sufficient. And to put it in terms shareholders understand.. support contract is cheaper than the cost of an alternative.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

Well it depends on the size of the one time payment. A 6 or 7 figure one time payment would likely get a maintainer to do something. But micro$oft should really be paying a long term support contract for sure.

[–] [email protected] 126 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

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. Then they a open a high priority bug item. The maintainer saying it's unacceptable is them basically saying they won't prioritize any work unless there's an existing support contract and that they don't do one off payments for bug fixes, which I think is fair.

[+] [email protected] -70 points 7 months ago (33 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 43 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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. A libre or permissive license does not commit the person who released it to making it work for anyone, for any reason. It is in fact the first line in those licenses.

They don't want to get paid for it being used. They want to get paid to continue working on it by people who need them to continue working on it.

[–] [email protected] 69 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

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. This might be a high priority problem for Microsoft but that does not make it so for ffmpeg.

The license allows Microsoft to use ffmpeg but they aren't entitled to demand free labor from the project. Really, no one is entitled to do so, but Microsoft being a large company who can definitely afford to put money or talent on the problem makes it only that much more egregious.

edit: I would note that asking for help or reporting a bug is usually welcome, the problematic part is demanding help because it's a high priority issue for YOUR customers.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's one thing to just use the software, it's another to open bug tickets that you expect the maintainer to prioritise. It's free software, the maintainer doesn't have to do anything for you. If they want tickets fixed with high priority, they should work something out with the maintainer.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm not really sure what you're saying here. Microsoft have every right to fix the bug themselves and the maintainer has every right not to. Open source software doesn't come with a warranty in most licensed.