The leadership is great. Persistent, patient and friendly.

They were able to improve. I don't think many of the often negative and ad-hominem critics would be able to endure such a pressure as they had in the past.

The GOS (GrapheneOS) lead had responded to criticisms like yours that he gladly retreats inside his tech role if others would take it upon them to refute the claims from rivals. So if you are that balanced, normal person, you could take that work out of his hands. Or help fund a full time PR person.

«In 2018, matters between Micay and Donaldson came to a head over Donaldson’s desire to pursue business deals with criminal organizations, and his attempts to compromise the security of CopperheadOS, including by proposing license enforcement and remote updating systems that would allow third-parties to have access to users’ phones. As part of this process, Donaldson began to demand that Micay provide Donaldson with the “signing keys” - i.e. the credentials required to verify the authenticity of releases of CopperheadOS. Donaldson advised that, in order to secure certain new business, potential customers required access to the Keys.»

Micay is rightfully paranoia, just having a GOS phone makes some government agencies quite mad. There are many ways a project like GOS could die, disinformation could certainly kill it. Other projects don't help the case if they throw mud at it. Rather, they should focus on their real technical shortcomings, but such articles aren't written somehow. https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm

EDIT

  > Should I make my own fork?

You could contact him to offer your help where he falls short.

Destroying the signing keys in the midst of a hostile takeover is the responsible thing to do. Its for the safety of their users. Thats a commendable trait to have.

Same, which is why I'm glad he deleted the signing key in this case. It was the only right play given the situation. I'd have done the same and I'd expect anyone with integrity to do likewise.

What does it means to "behave well" for you in this case ?

> if I can’t trust the developers to behave well, i can’t trust the product to continue to do what it says it can do for me.

So you'd be willing to give up Linux because Linus cannot stop verbally abusing people to this day? Because that's what I did. I decided that any project where the main dev(s) openly abuse people in public, is the line I draw.

I know that is an extremely controversial choice that many people will disagree with, but it's my choice to make and I don't regret it.

> > Daniel Micay has a history of absolutely unhinged behavior online

That quotation is from another comment in this discussion. Sadly, it is the sort of personal attack on his mental state that has been commonplace here at HN and elsewhere for a long time. I caution all to avoid such commentary. My long experience in tech r&d has firmly convinced me that mental health and wellness challenges are widespread, and should not be weaponized. I hope that clarifies my comment for you.

You always trust the developers of software. The only way to stop that is to not use the software.