Quote:
Originally Posted by Arios
eschwartz to add another argument to your post (# 27), it must be stressed that Sigil is free and maintained by volunteer work.
|
True, I suppose.
I could've made that point too.
But I find invariably that when that point gets made, the complainer-about-an-open-source-project starts talking about how open-source is a horrible idea because the horrible evil developers of horrible evil open-source projects always respond to any sort of "constructive" criticism by lashing out and telling them to stop using it if they don't like it.
But for the sake of completeness, I might as well touch on that as well...
Sigil is open-source. It was written to scratch an itch, and to serve the needs of the developers. It has been graciously shared with us as well.
We have no claim on their efforts. We have no contract forcing them to implement our exact wishes.
All we have, is the ability to suggest things, and hope they agree with us that Sigil would be a better EPUB editor (for
their definition of an EPUB editor) if those changes were made.
They have
every right to say "no, we don't want it to do that for you, just because we don't like the idea". The fact is, that they do, in fact, care about what WE need an EPUB editor to do, and give away their time to create something guided by our input -- which is above and beyond the fact that they share the hackable source and finished product for free.
If someone really believes that Kevin and Diap
don't care about the userbase, then why do they bother posting here at all? I mean, obviously, they will get nowhere, right? Because the developers hate them...
But that isn't even true! Because even the conclusion that @
eggheadbooks1's input was being ignored, was... wrong.
P.S. Thanks, peeps, for the karma
