> Personally, I don't feel any obligation. I'm working on octave and trying to
> deliver quality software, because I want to. Not because I have to. In my
> paid job as a software developer, I deliver quality code, because I have to
> (and also because I want to).
The "want to" part shows that pride in one's own workmanship plays an
important role in open source.
Yes, it's about pride (and fun), not about obligation.
> can also see that it's actually completely ignored by the main octave
> developers.
And it's a good thing not to waste developer time on such an OT
thread. My only reaction was against your argument that "OS can be as
crappy as it wants, and does not need to respond to user demands,
because it is not paid for".
This is a bit caricatural and you got me wrong if you think this is what I meant. What I meant was that we, unpaid people, try to do our best to deliver quality free software, but we won't accept to be insulted because one individual thinks the software doesn't do what he wants, and because he doesn't want to add a simple line in .octaverc to turn off the behaviors he doesn't want. Those "bugs" are actually features and they're not gonna change. So the only last resort solution I see is not using octave. But apparently the only solution he found is to keep complaining and insulting developers.
Michael.