The code of conduct: https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/blob/master/CODE_OF_COND...
Update - We are investigating reports of issues with many services impacting segments of customers. We will continue to keep users updated on progress towards mitigation. Jun 17, 2025 - 19:53 UTC
I have been around long enough (enduring the big swinging dicks) to understand why they are required.
The statements of inclusion in the README when the principal author campaigns against it indicates a dire lack of social skills. What hope is there for this?
I mostly agree with the critisisms of Wayland, I too have had to uninstall it to get what I need, but this all seems worse
Good luck to them, but I have no confidence
And I don’t imply the quality of code is good or not, I have no idea.
I've never seen either Torvalds or de Raadt go off on these mega-weird political rants completely unprompted, or inject that sort of thing in the project's README. Never mind going off on rants that smell an awful lot like Nazi apologetics. This is not just a matter of "how they're saying it", there are some real issues with what they're saying as well.
But you know, it's open source. He doesn't need mine or anyone else's permission. More power to him.
But it's really not the same as Torvalds or de Raadt. And it's also not so strange people want to steer clear of it.
source comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44200000
Well it's the code that matters. Not what their beliefs are.
code is also garbage
Well it's the thought that's important.
Guess "you can't have one without the other".
But it’s just a supposition at this stage, let’s see on the next’s month if it a complete mess or if it’s the XFree86 to Xorg transition
Definitely don't see this project having legs or at the very least not advancing very far.
For reasons I've never understood politics started invading open source about 10 years ago. What's weird is that these political ideas all seem to be highly aligned and this is the first major project that breaks that alignment.
Personally I'd prefer to see the politics, on both sides, disappear forever. It only pollutes the engineering and it fails to be convincing or meaningful in any other context.
> doesn't inspire confidence in longevity.
There are forces trying to kill X11 for their own internal reasons. I think as long as there is a project that is trying to maintain it, it will be successful, political warts and all.
It's particularly the reactionary stuff that concerns me when it comes to projects like this. When someone's motivation is tied to short-lived movements of social energy like that, I don't trust them to have a long term vision or investment in a project.
It's hard to imagine an energy that's apparently existed for 12 years and still going being described as "short-lived." Perhaps it's really just unfamiliar and that's why it seems so concerning?
Do you typically read the types of publications where that was likely to occur?
> I do recall the same rants about 3 or 4 other terms that ultimately resolve to “people that aren’t me are allowed to do things”, though.
Or perhaps you've just read second hand accounts of the phenomenon without actually confronting it directly? Which is what I presume given that you've come to such a self serving conclusion about it.
No, you're thinking of “Free Software” — “Open Source” was explicitly pro-corporate from the moment the term was coined. OSI themselves will tell you that “open source” as we know it was a product of AOL's desire to get people to work for them for free: https://opensource.org/history
“The [February 3rd, 1998] conferees believed the pragmatic, business-case grounds that had motivated Netscape to release their code illustrated a valuable way to engage with potential software users and developers, and convince them to create and improve source code by participating in an engaged community. The conferees also believed that it would be useful to have a single label that identified this approach and distinguished it from the philosophically- and politically-focused label ‘free software.’”
Some people choose to make open source political and that's their right, but it isn't inherently political. That is a choice one makes.
You may not have political opinions but you took political action....
Politics is "dirty", understandably. But people are mostly decent.
It is the evil powerful hideous people that make politics dirty and life bad
So acting as a decent considerate, loving even, person becomes a political act
Not good, things could be better, but it is what it is
For example, the removal of Jerry Pournelle's free account at MIT because he kept mentioning ARPANET in his column in Byte magazine. Then he accused MIT's sysadmins of being communists who wanted to destroy America's military...
That was 1985. The X project started the year before that.