While users can be demanding, this reads like a very immature response. Going out of your way to block support and prohibit packaging, which you can let others do with 0 seconds of your time, is kinda rude.

Author may have been harassed for all I know, but this is still an emotional response. They could have just said “yeah I’m not supporting this at all, figure it out yourselves if you want to” rather than actively blocking Linux functionality/packaging, which is what this sounds like.

From his readme…

As per the terms of CC-BY-NC-ND, redistribution of unmodified releases and code is permitted. However, we would prefer if you linked to www.duckstation.org instead. Please note that pre-configured settings and packages are considered modifications.

That long list of letters…

CC-BY-NC-ND, also known as Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives

Just because it’s open source doesn’t mean it’s necessarily open for all uses. His license explicitly denied using his code in packages. People did it anyway.

The problem with that is anybody can create a package and push it to a registry for others to download. Those packages can be horribly broken or outdated. People then find his repository on GitHub and create an issue that some random person’s package that contains his code is broken and he should fix it. I fully understand not wanting to become the defacto maintainer for a bunch of random packages. Not that he could anyway. This is his comment about talking to their packagers and not him.

He already releases AppImage and Flatpak builds as well as instruction for compiling it yourself on Linux.

This sounds more like a warning that if this continues he’s going to drop support entirely. Sounds like fielding the erroneous support requests is eating a significant portion of his time.

So this is more like source available rather than open source…

Most open source code has some license dictating its use. Some are wide open, others are not. Some just don’t want you adding it to a commercial app and making money off it. Does that physically stop anybody? Of course not. The source is right there.

I’ve ran into libraries that are free and open for basically everybody. If you’re a company though…pay a license fee. Didn’t matter if the app you wanted to include it in is available to the public or not. Corporate use is not free.