So looks like is getting forked:

About time!

@be Forked. This is in response to RMS digging in his heels. He has a lot of die-hard sycophants who will do whatever he says. They hang out in other GNU mailing lists.

This is mostly about those of us who don't want him in charge anymore. And maybe by demonstrating that we can get things done, we'll attract other GNU maintainers.

Who is digging in their heels? All we've been seeing are a bunch of shrill anti-RMS screamers, resorting the hyperbole.

One person tried to label him as a Donald Trump, haha. That was rich.


And from what we've seen, Microsoft-tentacles are involved. Reminds us of weapons for terrorists to fuel violence to destroy nice, empowering things.


@JordiGH @be
Let's tear apart GNU. Let's try to use weapons like identity to destroy nice empowering things like social programs.


Oh sh$t.

@JordiGH GNU and the FSF should have been separated by the cord a long time ago :pikeDetectiveNoLike:

@JordiGH taking the acronym with them was very much an unexpected approach, I do like how the projects dont need to be renamed but i hope this doesnt bite them in the ass.

@oct2pus I think they're trying to phrase this as not a hard fork. Just a friendly collection of GNU maintainers who are trying to make things better without listening to RMS. Since GNU never really had any defined social structure other than "do what RMS says", we'll see what happens.

@JordiGH I see there's a bunch of projects missing. Coreutils, bash, make, at a glance.

I'd love to see them join as well.

@faho bash is mostly Chet. I don't know know what Chet thinks about all of this drama. I get the feeling that Chet just wants to work on bash.

I think Coreutils and Make are effectively unmaintained, so there's probably nobody to bring them along.

@JordiGH I have a similar impression of Chet.

Coreutils has a reasonable release cadence with 10 releases in the past 7 years, Padraig Brady seems to be handling them all.

Also a bit of commit activity on

@JordiGH I wouldn’t call it a “fork”: fork applies to software, and the software in question is not being forked.

There are other answers in this thread:

@civodul @JordiGH Language, especially English, especially among nerds, is a bit too flexible to stay with original scopes and definitions.

Just as an example we love to anthropomorphize machines and processes, even though they hate it when we do that.

@JordiGH Sorry for the stupid question, but does this signal the end of copyright assignment? Or will they keep that practice and just change it appropriately (assign to the assembly, make it quick and painless).

@wasamasa @JordiGH It's done selectively anyway. Poster child is GNU Nano that is part FSF, part individuals.
If the Assembly doesn't want to be a fork, Wurmus's explanation at… has more substance and makes more sense than "doesn't apply".

@wasamasa A lot of GNU packages, perhaps even most, have never done copyright assignments.

GNU is already a fragmented mess. I actually kind of help this will help bring about more unification.

@JordiGH I mean, I hope this coming from the Guile people means contributions will become easier.

@wasamasa Quite possibly. It'll be interesting to see what happens. I assume GNU packages that have been doing copyright assignments might keep on doing so. The FSF would never willingly give that up.

@Ninmi @JordiGH No more rms randomly dropping into your project's technical or policy discussions.
@clacke @JordiGH I've always felt quite at ease with RMS on the wheel, even if he is obviously often not the best PR person for the movement. It's nice nice to have someone so incredibly devoted the cause, though obviously that's not a very sustainable strategy in the long run.

I know Vim flourished after it had been unshackled from just being Bram's hobby project and turned in to a community driven project in the form of Neovim, and perhaps GNU can benefit from something like that as well as well.

@Ninmi @clacke He's not really at the wheel. He never has been. He pretends like he is and sometimes he'll swoop in to some GNU package to cause trouble but most of the time most GNU packages do whatever they want.

It's a bad way to lead and has led to fragmentation. R, Gimp, Gnome, GTK, Ghostcript and other GNU-in-name-only and often not really in name, without regards to the rest of GNU.

GNU may look cohesive from the outside, from the inside it's anything but.

@Ninmi @clacke And I get it, he's charismatic in some ways. The technological monk out there keeping it real for the rest of us. The one who never bends, who never surrenders. I too was a big fan one day.

But this doesn't work. Having a frickin' saint who practices technological abnegation that we can point at does little to actually put free software in the hands of users who need it the most.

@Ninmi @clacke This isn't some epic battle between FAMANG and the FSF, as much as we would like to romanticise it to be. This is merely RMS throwing ineffective tantrums when his actual followers and supporters accidentally use the wrong words. FAMANG is barely aware of the existence of the FSF.

@JordiGH @Ninmi It's easy to see the harm in fragmentation and internal strife. The question is if the outcome makes it worth it.

I think a large subset of GNU with a vision to better embrace newcomers and the larger society has the potential to do more good than all of GNU until now.
@JordiGH @Ninmi Yes, that's a good point. Still, making it official may or may not be the right decision for any given situation.

In this case it was a long time coming and no surprise. Still I wasn't quite prepared to see it already. People must have put a lot of effort into this.
> Gathering under a New Umbrella

nice one, very true to form


"This Group’s Not Uniform — We have common goals but also different backgrounds, and we view it as a strength."

""yep, we have evicted the initiator of the movement from our non-uniform groups.""

"and we view it as a strength."

I see it like a putsch.

@hicks @JordiGH RMS was never part of the GNU Assembly, so it's kinda hard to evict him. The more interesting question might be if they allow him to join according to the house rules they agreed upon (described at

I think the less interesting question is if we'll ever find out: I don't see that happening because RMS doesn't seem capable of being just a part of something greater.
Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!