@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.
@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 https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/log/
@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:
@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 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.
@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 @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.
"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.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!