The Non dev was being abusive in public threads and even nastier in private mails to various Linux Audio devs.
The full story is on the archives of the Linux Audio Development and Consortium mailing lists.
Folk should come visit #lad (Linux/Libre) on Libera.Chat.
In the business world, this is a clear case of trademark infringement and they would be sued out of existence.
In the business world, picking a different name for marketing and using functional elements for compatibility is a good way to get sued but win. See, for instance, Sega v. Accolade - Accolade sold software for the Sega Genesis without Sega's approval. Sega added something to the Genesis game loader which checked for the string "SEGA" and displayed the message "Produced by or under license from Sega Enterprises LTD." Accolade's games caused that message to appear, even though there was no license. The courts ruled that Accolade was entitled to do this, because the point was compatibility.
It's interesting to see the instance of HN groupthink speculation (and lack of google fu) there has been in this comment section. Folk should come idle/chat in #lad. It's available via Matrix.
Fork the project and pick another name. Spend the effort to market and build the integration with the new name. No one would have a problem.
I think it should be clear to anyone the relationship; the README mentioned JML from the get go, it's not framed as NON related, there is reference client and daemon, and it's just the same acronym because there's no reason to change.
The new projects name is New Session Manager.
Using the same acronym and the same binary file names to push out Non from the distribution is very underhanded.
This looks like a deliberate aim to confuse the users and taking over the project code and identity. It's not cool.
I don't know JML and don't know his development style. Since he has been gracious enough to open source his project, I assume he's generous enough to share his hard work with others. If people don't like his style, fork the project with a different identity and compete on the merits, rather than stealing his project's identity with confusion.
You are trying to argue a course of action that would just have confused both users and devs.
Providing a citation is pointing at a specific place where the information came from at the smallest granular level. In this case, a citation would be something like links to specific threads.
Edit: also, I've no obligation to provide a citation, I'm one of those that's bored by this particular drama, folk can go search for posts of they want, I've given enough to go by.
>The full story is on the archives of the Linux Audio Development and Consortium mailing lists.
However creating a fork with the same acronym and name for the daemon or binaries or whatever seems pretty under-handed.
Was a release announcement for the original software moderated, on a list where release announcements had been posted without moderation before the fork? Was the author banned from lists?
That's why Ubuntu has the alternatives system. And why mawk / gawk / etc. are often linked to /bin/awk.
And it's entirely possible to use different software names for projects that implement a compatible API or service, the claim that it's for compatibility is pretty bogus. It's not "standard", especially not for an adversarial fork. And that's not why the alternatives system exists, the alternatives system exists so differently named packages can implement a particular service (i.e., exactly the opposite, for the equivalent in shell commands). So that's underhanded.
They are used to make packages with differently named binaries able to implement standard shell commands.
There is no need to match binary names. It doesn't really help with anything.
A ban did occur on the LAD mailing list, but to the best of my knowledge the ban occurred due to some off list emails with one of the list moderators.