3 ms·

Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed at how quickly the perception turned against OBS. Maybe I'm missing something, but their "threats" actually seem pretty reasonable:

by jchw 2y ago

Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed at how quickly the perception turned against OBS. Maybe I'm missing something, but their "threats" actually seem pretty reasonable: They asked Fedora to stop shipping a broken version of OBS/make it clear that the Fedora version is unofficial, they got absolutely no response for three weeks, then they requested that Fedora cease using the OBS trademarks. This is not like xscreensaver, this is much closer to Firefox/Iceweasel/etc.

rincebrain 2y ago
I wasn't trying to suggest I thought OBS was in the wrong here, to be clear, just that the debate between maintainers and developers, and not wanting to get bugs for things that were external, reminded me of that exchange. There's plenty of other examples, of course - one that springs to mind was when Ubuntu shipped a patch of their own design in OpenZFS that caused data loss, and it got reported to upstream.
- jchw 2y ago
  To be fair, not necessarily singling out your comment: I've seen mixed sentiment around the net. I think the characterization of the threats as being "legal threats" makes people more prone to see this as the OBS project being vexatious, but it seems like it's more a last resort to get Fedora to even pay attention. And credit to Fedora, it looks like they're working quickly to fix the problem now. It's pretty obvious it wasn't malice that led them to not respond quickly.
  - bigiain 2y ago
    > It's pretty obvious it wasn't malice that led them to not respond quickly. So stupidity then. Seems legit.
    - thomasfedb 2y ago
      That’s a poor faith comment. I’m a Fedora packager (not for this package). Like many others I have an unrelated day job. If there’s an upstream complaint I might get to it this weekend, maybe next. If I’m busy for a few weeks that doesn’t make me stupid. Have had my share of “discussions” with upstream who want the latest version packaged when this might not be completely in line with our guidelines. Not an uncommon issue.
      - mattl 2y ago
        Thanks for being a packager for Fedora. I appreciate your work. About to start playing with Fedora again on my Steam Deck.
        thomasfedb 2y ago
        It’s a rewarding experience. A bit voodoo magic until you wrap your head around all the utilities, build systems, workflows, and then quite pleasant.
      - nindalf 2y ago
        Yeah it’s not fair to expect volunteers to show up on weekdays, I agree with you. But equally, I don’t think it’s fair that packagers want to have it both ways. Packagers want to make subtle, possibly breaking changes to software they didn’t author. The end users feel the pain and complain to the author. The author has no control over the situation, and they’re feeling the pain during the working week. So the packager has been instrumental in creating the problem with the patch, and when requested to do something about it, turns around and says “buddy I do this for free, I’ll get to it over the weekend, maybe.” Sure, but the author is feeling the pain right now. Again, it’s nice that you’re volunteering your time for others. But it would be good if you acknowledged that the costs of packaging aren’t borne entirely by packagers. Authors bear part of the cost when they get blamed for broken software.
        thomasfedb 2y ago
        Sometimes changes are required to meet packaging guidelines, sometimes you can get exemptions. Of course users often don’t realise who’s done what. I suppose my advice to upstream would be to direct the end user to the Fedora bug tracker, where the bug can land in my queue. Or advise the user to install from a different source. The upstream that I’ve dealt with have been kind enough to lodge a bug themselves on the package I look after, which is also an option, and much appreciated.
        lmm 2y ago
  - ikiris 2y ago
    If you read the actual bug thread with the back and forth, they weren't to the point the fedora contact was pretty hostile about their use of a slightly old QT version and was adamant about keeping it in place. The fixes only happened within hours after the trademark/copyright request presumably because that went to legal and legal WTF'd at the whole situation and their maintainer's handling of the situation and magically it got fixed almost immediately thereafter.

by jchw 2y ago

rincebrain 2y ago

I wasn't trying to suggest I thought OBS was in the wrong here, to be clear, just that the debate between maintainers and developers, and not wanting to get bugs for things that were external, reminded me of that exchange. There's plenty of other examples, of course - one that springs to mind was when Ubuntu shipped a patch of their own design in OpenZFS that caused data loss, and it got reported to upstream.

jchw 2y ago
To be fair, not necessarily singling out your comment: I've seen mixed sentiment around the net. I think the characterization of the threats as being "legal threats" makes people more prone to see this as the OBS project being vexatious, but it seems like it's more a last resort to get Fedora to even pay attention. And credit to Fedora, it looks like they're working quickly to fix the problem now. It's pretty obvious it wasn't malice that led them to not respond quickly.
- bigiain 2y ago
  > It's pretty obvious it wasn't malice that led them to not respond quickly. So stupidity then. Seems legit.
  - thomasfedb 2y ago
    That’s a poor faith comment. I’m a Fedora packager (not for this package). Like many others I have an unrelated day job. If there’s an upstream complaint I might get to it this weekend, maybe next. If I’m busy for a few weeks that doesn’t make me stupid. Have had my share of “discussions” with upstream who want the latest version packaged when this might not be completely in line with our guidelines. Not an uncommon issue.
    - mattl 2y ago
      Thanks for being a packager for Fedora. I appreciate your work. About to start playing with Fedora again on my Steam Deck.
      - thomasfedb 2y ago
        It’s a rewarding experience. A bit voodoo magic until you wrap your head around all the utilities, build systems, workflows, and then quite pleasant.
    - nindalf 2y ago
      Yeah it’s not fair to expect volunteers to show up on weekdays, I agree with you. But equally, I don’t think it’s fair that packagers want to have it both ways. Packagers want to make subtle, possibly breaking changes to software they didn’t author. The end users feel the pain and complain to the author. The author has no control over the situation, and they’re feeling the pain during the working week. So the packager has been instrumental in creating the problem with the patch, and when requested to do something about it, turns around and says “buddy I do this for free, I’ll get to it over the weekend, maybe.” Sure, but the author is feeling the pain right now. Again, it’s nice that you’re volunteering your time for others. But it would be good if you acknowledged that the costs of packaging aren’t borne entirely by packagers. Authors bear part of the cost when they get blamed for broken software.
      - thomasfedb 2y ago
        Sometimes changes are required to meet packaging guidelines, sometimes you can get exemptions. Of course users often don’t realise who’s done what. I suppose my advice to upstream would be to direct the end user to the Fedora bug tracker, where the bug can land in my queue. Or advise the user to install from a different source. The upstream that I’ve dealt with have been kind enough to lodge a bug themselves on the package I look after, which is also an option, and much appreciated.
        lmm 2y ago
- ikiris 2y ago
  If you read the actual bug thread with the back and forth, they weren't to the point the fedora contact was pretty hostile about their use of a slightly old QT version and was adamant about keeping it in place. The fixes only happened within hours after the trademark/copyright request presumably because that went to legal and legal WTF'd at the whole situation and their maintainer's handling of the situation and magically it got fixed almost immediately thereafter.