Damn, what's c/memes going to post about now?

The lesson I took away wasn’t that open source always wins. It was that once an open platform that people can customize becomes the industry’s center of gravity, no single vendor can match the combined rate of innovation around it.

Isn't that the main reason why "open source always wins"? What do old industry folk think made open source software so prevalent in the modern software landscape if not explicitly this reason? We can debate security, archival, extended support, but at the end of the day isn't this the explicitly the main reason? Centralized development efforts for a greater good?

Cool (god I hope my company doesn't try and roll something like this)

The Xbox One controller is a bit goofy. I noticed the newest firmware actually makes it misbehave with the usual stack under linux. Haven't had the time to debug since my controller was on it's last legs anyway. Try rolling it back a release or 2.

I was only concerned with why they didn't try and work with the existing community effort.

Man, if it was that simple, ALARM wouldn't exist and arch would have (at least) allowed aarch64 packages in the AUR years ago. There are other factors in play than what I listed above, but it's still weird to not even mention the existing community efforts.

Reproducible builds are one step closer than what ALARM was already providing. It's cool, but it's still just one step up, and a rewrite. I don't understand why Collabora went in this direction aside from having more billable hours.

Package repositories, recipes, and support paths

Yeah, they jumped straight into reinventing the wheel for some reason. Alarm forums may be dead but the project and repos are still getting updates. Why spin your own shit?

They, uh, didn't even mention the ALARM project?

DXVK cache lingering between driver versions has occasionally gotten me similar effects. You can delete the shader cache in the proton prefix and see if that helps.

MIT is perfectly fine. Most people want something more copyleft to avoid corporate bs. I use GPLv3 to make sure my company doesn't do anything dumb. GPLv2 and MIT are fine if you just want credit.

AGPL is also cool, but I normally see it used in client/server configurations to prevent people from hiding the useful stuff under a different service.

Anything OSI approved will at least protect you from anything. The other licenses I see floating around usually get in trouble for vague language that can be interpreted in unintended ways.

Here's the big book of licenses if you feel like skimming: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html

Why recommend a license that isn't OSI approved?