Hacker News Reader

Comment by sfRattan | Hacker News Reader

Any software that re-arranges my files and folders without asking is a non-starter. So is any software that copies my files into its own set of folders and obscures any attempt to understand those folders.

Calibre isn't as bad as iTunes, which will silently delete classical music ripped from a CD and replace the tracks with other orchestras performing the same piece... But Calibre has no concept of, "this user's files are already organized the way the user wants them to be."

It's a manifestation of developer arrogance to not even give the end user the option.

View on HN

> It's a manifestation of developer arrogance to not even give the end user the option.

Calibre is a free, open source software. If it doesn’t fit your flow - don’t use it. The author doesn’t owe you anything. You should be thanking him for his great job that he does for free, instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally.

> you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally.

They never said this, only that developing a product to be used by a lot of people and completely disregarding a (arguably very common) use case is arrogant.

This isn't what arrogance is though.

> instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime

Goyal has stated that he would not merge the feature even if other people did the work.

> ...instead you decide that you’re somehow entitled to more of his lifetime dedicated to the features important to you personally.

Please don't put words in my mouth. It's insulting, rude, and also arrogant.

Nowhere have I suggested that I am entitled to anything. Nowhere have I requested multiple features. You're writing as if I'm in this developer's issue tracker making demands. I'm not. We're both in a thread on a forum separate from Calibre's development and maintenance where the topic of discussion is Calibre's strengths and shortcomings.

I did imply that not providing an off-switch for tangential complexity in software is an arrogant design decision. I stand by that opinion.

> Please don't put words in my mouth. It's insulting, rude, and also arrogant.

:) so you’re complaining that the existing feature set doesn’t cover your use case, calling this decision arrogant, but _in fact_ you do not want this feature implemented? Right. Now I follow. Of course you didn’t say that. My apologies.

> You're writing as if I'm in this developer's issue tracker making demands. I'm not. We're both in a thread on a forum separate from…

Calling people arrogant for the choices they made working on a product (useful to thousands) for free is exactly what entitlement is. It would be actually better if you did the same in the issue tracker, at least the author could have blocked you and limit the toxicity.

It’s not up to you to decide for the author of the free tool what features should be implemented in this tool. You didn’t pay a cent to him. You do not have any right to criticize him in this tone.

What you could do is ask politely and leave quietly if the request was denied. Or you could suggest better alternatives as the author of the linked article did. Everything else is nothing but entitlement. And yeah, I stand by that opinion too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com