4 ms·

The fact that the person who sent the C&D email allegedly tried to "take over" the Libreboot name (according to TFA) is also not a good look. I found this: htt

by whstl 3y ago

The fact that the person who sent the C&D email allegedly tried to "take over" the Libreboot name (according to TFA) is also not a good look. I found this: https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at > Who are we? Denis ‘GNUtoo’ Carikli and Adrien ‘neox’ Bourmault. We created this and maintain it. > take a stand for fully free software is to change URLs across the web from <libreboot.org> to <libreboot.at>, and to let people know that no other version of Libreboot is reliably free software

evasb 3y ago
[flagged]
- whstl 3y ago
  I have no idea who those people are and their pasts, and have no horse in this race, but according to the https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at website by Adrien Bourmault, Leah was the founder of the project. According to this [1], the alleged takeover you mention not only didn't involve Adrien or Denis Carikli, it also happened in 2021, two years before the creation of https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at, which seems to be from 2023, and GNU Boot, that succeeded libreboot.at [2] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot.org/news/resignations.html https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot... or https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html if you want a third-party [2] https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/libreboot-devel/2023-03/threads.html https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/libreboot-devel/2023-0... Either way, it seems that if there was any problem around the usage of the GNU Boot name, it was solved by adding disclaimers galore: http://notgnuboot.vimuser.org/ http://notgnuboot.vimuser.org/ To me the disclaimers above show enough good faith. Meanwhile https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at continues up. I don't think we should be that harsh and accusatory to someone after they actually comply with the request of changing a page name and adding disclaimers.
  - Propelloni 3y ago
    It appears to be a bonfire of vanities on all sides. One side goes "I use the trust you invested in me to block you from project resources, because my other project is soo much better but has less name-recognition." The other side goes "We are more pure, more righteous, and more petty at the same time! Let's show the other side by registering a confusing domain name and release a similiar but still different software with a long blurb why the other side is bad and must be destroyed! Oh yeah, and let's write scathing e-mails so nobody misses that we are petty." This seems so weird to me. Why invest the energy? In the olden days we'd just fork and get to work.
    - whstl 3y ago
      'One side goes"I use the trust you invested in me to block you from project resources, because my other project is soo much better but has less name-recognition"' As some of us already said multiple times, this is a completely different story and unrelated to this. Let's maybe lets this misunderstanding die?
    - pravus 3y ago
      Welcome to the GNU universe. This kind of thing was more prominent in the 00's and I've basically sworn off ever contributing to any GPL projects or using GPL licenses because of how GNU has acted over time. At odd times they get extremely vocal over issues and the responses are typically of the "you are wrong" kind.
- amatecha 3y ago
  Rather than append an edit at the end, just delete your post if it was completely debunked, otherwise people, like myself, read a paragraph of text only to learn it's all apparently "debunked".
  - arcanemachiner 3y ago
    Maybe a TLDR at the top would be better. There's often some pretty crucial context that gets nuked when the entire post gets deleted.
    - amatecha 3y ago
      Yeah I guess that could be better. I literally just read every comment by that user (not realizing it was the same person), thinking "oh dang this is rough" and then at the end seeing the "EDIT lol nm" and realizing I just totally got misled, AGAIN. Super uncool. If your text is proven false, I don't want to read it or even glance at it (or even have to scroll past it, or have my network/browser load it, for that matter).
      - mst 3y ago
        I agree with putting it at the top, but leaving the mistake there but marked as being a mistake is useful in case somebody else accidentally makes the same mistake later.
      - dcow 3y ago
        You can only edit for a few hours.
        amatecha 3y ago
        Yeah, guess it was already too late then. :\
  - Incipient 3y ago
    It's an interesting point. I think it's educational to have people obviously adjusting their position when corrected. It's almost a rarity these days, and I think someone accepting they were wrong is refreshing! Granted, the TLDR at the top would have helped haha, especially if it was a long post.
- enneff 3y ago
  You should be more reluctant to label someone as “not trustworthy”! FWIW today is the first I’ve heard of Leah and I spent some time reading their website (vimuser.org) and they seem to be quite conscientious and thorough in explaining their work and the rationales behind it. This whole thing has kindled some interest in using a free boot loader on my system. Looking forward to trying it out.
opan 3y ago
I'm not up to date on these events yet, but GNUtoo is a Guix contributor I see around a fair bit on the mailing list and IRC, which makes this seem more interesting. It's not just a random person who got mad about stuff, but someone very involved in other official GNU stuff. Not familiar with neox, but wouldn't surprise me if they're similarly involved in free software stuff elsewhere.
ddalex 3y ago
I don't understand the frackas about a library that reboots your computer being free or not....
- mPReDiToR 3y ago
  I read it that way too. Lib reboot. Always have, but it took LibreOffice becoming mainstream to make the correction mostly unnoticeable.
  - Gracana 3y ago
    My favorite is the GNU libiberty library, which is picked up when you pass the -liberty option to gcc. :D
mcv 3y ago
I hadn't heard about this drama before, but as I can piece things together, Leah has been maintaining Libreboot and another boot system for years. Denis and Adrien disagreed with Leah's decision to include binaries, created their own version of Libreboot without those binaries and published it under the same name on a very similar domain trying to claim the existing Libreboot name for their version. Then I suspect Leah disagreed with that fork both on technical merits (it's based on old code) and with the stealing of the name, but she agreed with the need for a version without the binaries, so she made that and published it under the name GNUboot, intended for Denis and Adrien to base their work on, and now Denis and Adrien are complaining that she's misusing the GNU name. Is that roughly a correct summary? Because if it is, it sounds to me like both sides do have valid points, but handled the disagreement very poorly. Denis and Adrien complaining that Leah stole the GNU name when they just stole the Libreboot name, sounds very hypocritical. The whole thing would be a lot better if both sides stopped the drama and powergames and just worked together to create the best possible boot systems; one with the binaries and one without.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- b112 3y ago
  I often wonder if someone is whispering in people's ears, to destroy such projects. For example, a long email history on any of these people(and even if you don't use, people you email do use gmail), from a central store such as gmail, would provide immense insight into personality traits, etc. Which means external motivaters could be used as handy leavers to drive dissent. Little spats like this, erode project trust, and just divert energy. Anyhow, no idea if this is happening. I guess if you really do want to destroy something, just let Oracle buy it, so maybe I'm off here.
  - toyg 3y ago
    Most FOSS projects are unpaid, and the only reward is nerd-fame. That's why maintainers are often petty about credits and "ownership".
  - 3y ago

by whstl 3y ago

evasb 3y ago

[flagged]

whstl 3y ago
I have no idea who those people are and their pasts, and have no horse in this race, but according to the https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at website by Adrien Bourmault, Leah was the founder of the project. According to this [1], the alleged takeover you mention not only didn't involve Adrien or Denis Carikli, it also happened in 2021, two years before the creation of https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at, which seems to be from 2023, and GNU Boot, that succeeded libreboot.at [2] [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot.org/news/resignations.html https://web.archive.org/web/20210331005023/https://libreboot... or https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html if you want a third-party [2] https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/libreboot-devel/2023-03/threads.html https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/libreboot-devel/2023-0... Either way, it seems that if there was any problem around the usage of the GNU Boot name, it was solved by adding disclaimers galore: http://notgnuboot.vimuser.org/ http://notgnuboot.vimuser.org/ To me the disclaimers above show enough good faith. Meanwhile https://libreboot.at https://libreboot.at continues up. I don't think we should be that harsh and accusatory to someone after they actually comply with the request of changing a page name and adding disclaimers.
- Propelloni 3y ago
  It appears to be a bonfire of vanities on all sides. One side goes "I use the trust you invested in me to block you from project resources, because my other project is soo much better but has less name-recognition." The other side goes "We are more pure, more righteous, and more petty at the same time! Let's show the other side by registering a confusing domain name and release a similiar but still different software with a long blurb why the other side is bad and must be destroyed! Oh yeah, and let's write scathing e-mails so nobody misses that we are petty." This seems so weird to me. Why invest the energy? In the olden days we'd just fork and get to work.
  - whstl 3y ago
    'One side goes"I use the trust you invested in me to block you from project resources, because my other project is soo much better but has less name-recognition"' As some of us already said multiple times, this is a completely different story and unrelated to this. Let's maybe lets this misunderstanding die?
  - pravus 3y ago
    Welcome to the GNU universe. This kind of thing was more prominent in the 00's and I've basically sworn off ever contributing to any GPL projects or using GPL licenses because of how GNU has acted over time. At odd times they get extremely vocal over issues and the responses are typically of the "you are wrong" kind.
amatecha 3y ago
Rather than append an edit at the end, just delete your post if it was completely debunked, otherwise people, like myself, read a paragraph of text only to learn it's all apparently "debunked".
- arcanemachiner 3y ago
  Maybe a TLDR at the top would be better. There's often some pretty crucial context that gets nuked when the entire post gets deleted.
  - amatecha 3y ago
    Yeah I guess that could be better. I literally just read every comment by that user (not realizing it was the same person), thinking "oh dang this is rough" and then at the end seeing the "EDIT lol nm" and realizing I just totally got misled, AGAIN. Super uncool. If your text is proven false, I don't want to read it or even glance at it (or even have to scroll past it, or have my network/browser load it, for that matter).
    - mst 3y ago
      I agree with putting it at the top, but leaving the mistake there but marked as being a mistake is useful in case somebody else accidentally makes the same mistake later.
    - dcow 3y ago
      You can only edit for a few hours.
      - amatecha 3y ago
        Yeah, guess it was already too late then. :\
- Incipient 3y ago
  It's an interesting point. I think it's educational to have people obviously adjusting their position when corrected. It's almost a rarity these days, and I think someone accepting they were wrong is refreshing! Granted, the TLDR at the top would have helped haha, especially if it was a long post.
enneff 3y ago
You should be more reluctant to label someone as “not trustworthy”! FWIW today is the first I’ve heard of Leah and I spent some time reading their website (vimuser.org) and they seem to be quite conscientious and thorough in explaining their work and the rationales behind it. This whole thing has kindled some interest in using a free boot loader on my system. Looking forward to trying it out.

opan 3y ago

I'm not up to date on these events yet, but GNUtoo is a Guix contributor I see around a fair bit on the mailing list and IRC, which makes this seem more interesting. It's not just a random person who got mad about stuff, but someone very involved in other official GNU stuff. Not familiar with neox, but wouldn't surprise me if they're similarly involved in free software stuff elsewhere.

ddalex 3y ago

I don't understand the frackas about a library that reboots your computer being free or not....

mPReDiToR 3y ago
I read it that way too. Lib reboot. Always have, but it took LibreOffice becoming mainstream to make the correction mostly unnoticeable.
- Gracana 3y ago
  My favorite is the GNU libiberty library, which is picked up when you pass the -liberty option to gcc. :D

mcv 3y ago

I hadn't heard about this drama before, but as I can piece things together, Leah has been maintaining Libreboot and another boot system for years. Denis and Adrien disagreed with Leah's decision to include binaries, created their own version of Libreboot without those binaries and published it under the same name on a very similar domain trying to claim the existing Libreboot name for their version. Then I suspect Leah disagreed with that fork both on technical merits (it's based on old code) and with the stealing of the name, but she agreed with the need for a version without the binaries, so she made that and published it under the name GNUboot, intended for Denis and Adrien to base their work on, and now Denis and Adrien are complaining that she's misusing the GNU name. Is that roughly a correct summary? Because if it is, it sounds to me like both sides do have valid points, but handled the disagreement very poorly. Denis and Adrien complaining that Leah stole the GNU name when they just stole the Libreboot name, sounds very hypocritical. The whole thing would be a lot better if both sides stopped the drama and powergames and just worked together to create the best possible boot systems; one with the binaries and one without.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
b112 3y ago
I often wonder if someone is whispering in people's ears, to destroy such projects. For example, a long email history on any of these people(and even if you don't use, people you email do use gmail), from a central store such as gmail, would provide immense insight into personality traits, etc. Which means external motivaters could be used as handy leavers to drive dissent. Little spats like this, erode project trust, and just divert energy. Anyhow, no idea if this is happening. I guess if you really do want to destroy something, just let Oracle buy it, so maybe I'm off here.
- toyg 3y ago
  Most FOSS projects are unpaid, and the only reward is nerd-fame. That's why maintainers are often petty about credits and "ownership".
- 3y ago