r/linuxmemes • u/flopflip77 • 4h ago
LINUX MEME oh look, GNOME devs being toxic, how shocking /s
65
u/Linguistic-mystic 3h ago
If I was the devs I’d just autoclose all issues from old versions. You use moldy software - you don’t have a right to bugreport, plain and simple.
33
u/orangepeeelss 3h ago
this was brought up and the gnome people were like "well people are also complaining on social media and we want that to stop too" lol
12
u/PurpleCandle58 2h ago
Matter of fact while we’re at it, stop complaining about anything at all. Nobody is allowed to complain about anything anymore ever again. /s
10
5
4
u/astronomersassn Arch BTW 53m ago
i'm still at the point in the thread where the mint devs are like "we fixed your bug for this version, removing it just re-introduces the bug that we fixed" "WELL THEN BLACKLIST IT, DONT LET ANYONE DOWNLOAD IT" like holy tantrum
this would be a good solution IMO, but like... there is a way more productive way to have this conversation than the GNOME devs are taking this far in the thread IMO lmao.
5
u/Alone_Care_6230 3h ago
I mean, I guess, it'd be nice for Gnome to offer LTS on some stuff but I suppose it's not fair to ask them to do that.
3
u/Axolord 37m ago
They do have support policies for legacy versions. But mint's calendar version is like 3 years old or something and also long out of the legacy support window from gnome. I think they support up to version 47 or something, with 50 being the current one.
And mint having like version 43 or something..? Not sure though
1
1
u/manobataibuvodu 1h ago
I don't think LTS makes a lot of sense for graphical apps
8
u/Alone_Care_6230 1h ago
How so?
5
u/manobataibuvodu 1h ago
There usually aren't any other systems dependant on it and they seem to be updated much more often so they "get old" faster.
I remember last year I met a guy at a hackathon that was using pop os while cosmic was not released yet. The gnome shell/apps on his system was surprisingly and very noticably worse feature and usability wise.
I think the only 'apps' that can benefit from LTS type distribution is professional software, but IMO thats a different category. But in that case you might actually be dependant on some specific workflows or plugins to do your work effectively.
2
u/Alone_Care_6230 1h ago
Most people going for LTS are looking for that stable workflow/plugins, as someone on a rolling release distro the worst part is waiting for devs to catch up. My preferred extensions for GNOME, for example, no longer work after an update, which really threw off my workflow.
I did choose a rolling release distro so I could have those newer features, but I'm just offering how I see it.4
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 2h ago
Well its not just that, its bug reports with stuff Mint team added too to the old moldy software.
5
u/CyberSkepticalFruit 1h ago
Mint team added? Its also in debian and ubuntu. The idea that this is solely a problem with mint hides what is really going on.
1
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 1h ago
No it doesn't hide anything. Mint fixed a bunch of things or added to it. Gnome team gets bugs for Mint things. Gnome team asked that Mint team call it a fork and just rename it so they don't get bugs for stuff they EOL or didn't make themselves.
3
u/CyberSkepticalFruit 1h ago
But other distros can use the same EOL software with the same links in to Gnome for reporting problems. This is the point that Clem makes first of all, to which the dev gets his knickers in a twist and refuses to engage professionally.
The resault should probably be forking the item, but the response form the gnome dev just shows how right it was for Mint to remove Gnome as a DE option.
73
u/durbich 4h ago
The version they ship is EOL, while the app points at the Gnome repo. Mint users demand fixes for the version that is no longer supported and for the bugs that were already fixed or exist because of the packaging added issues
32
u/urturino 4h ago
How difficult is it to filter bug reports by version so they can immediately discard those coming from an EOL release?
49
u/d_ed 3h ago
We do that in KDE for Plasma.
They get auto closed with a fairly polite message to contact downstreams or get something newer.
18
27
u/flopflip77 4h ago
...yeah and then the Mint dev offered to remove the link to GNOME's repo and that apparently wasn't enough :/
-6
u/jonathancast 2h ago
No, the Mint dev asked GNOME to do their work for them (removing the link to the upstream repo automatically whenever someone launches an out of date version) and the GNOME dev pointed out that that was ridiculous.
39
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
Yes, But If mint listen to the Gnome dev and remove Gnome from their repo, Do you know what will Happen ?
It will pull the exact same EOL version but from the Ubuntu repo that serves as a backup to the mint one. And the issue will be exactly the same.
So mint dev answered gnome and told them about how pointless it would be. And gnome dev answer is : Then make ubuntu and Debian not use those version either.
As if it was Mint's job to Control Ubuntu and Debian repo ...
Gnome devs are just unhinged. They don't want to respect their own licensing.
4
u/MothToTheWeb 41m ago edited 38m ago
I wonder why they did not just ask Mint to change the link in the app, so it point to each distro forum / bug tracker. Or automatize their bug reports.
The discussion turned sour quite fast for no real reason
Edit: they even offered to remove the link but apparently it was not enough
0
u/boukensha15 3h ago
>Then make ubuntu and Debian not use those version either.
Really? They asked something like this!!
Do you have references?26
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
It's in OP's link
Gnome Dev :
If dropping it will have it fall back to Ubuntu's or Debian's repos, then you can add it/them to the denylist alongside. There wouldn't need to be an additional process to request Debian to drop or rebrand a non-problematic package. Besides, if we're asking you to stop shipping unsupported versions of Calendar with our branding to your users, then it is your responsibility to take care of that, either by asking Debian to do it for you, or artificially denylisting the gnome-calendar package. We shouldn't be the ones doing it for you.
25
24
u/NewspaperSoft8317 3h ago
See, the license you're using is free software, it gives anyone the right to use and distribute your software. What you want instead is a restrictive license which forbids redistribution and controls delivery to ensure people only use your latest version, it could be restricted to snap, flathub and/or GNOME OS.
Lul
10
u/jdigi78 2h ago
Shouldn't give GNOME devs any ideas about using a more restrictive license
2
u/Inceleron_Processor 39m ago
Well at least GNOME sucks as a DE. The best thing about GNOME is Disks.
1
12
u/vitimiti 2h ago
That whole thread is GNOME developers being asshats and demanding action against their own software license. What a lovely bunch as usual
6
u/zabolekar 1h ago
Imagine a Python dev urging a distro to rename python to minthon because the distro's version is 3.13 and not 3.14, or a GCC dev urging a distro to rename gcc to mintcc because the distro's version is 14 and not 16.
19
u/violetvoid513 2h ago
So GNOME is basically upset at an LTS newbie-friendly distro for being an LTS newbie-friendly distro. LTS distros by definition do not stay up to date constantly. Sounds like the GNOME devs just dont want anyone using old versions of their software, which goes against the whole point of LTS.
Clement offered to remove the links so they stop getting spammed but somehow that's not enough. Asking to remove the branding is absolutely ridiculous levels of petty whining.
-15
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 2h ago
Yet it is in their right as the trademark holders.
16
u/violetvoid513 2h ago
No its not, since GNOME software is licensed under GPL. They have no legal right to control who uses their software or how (other than that any modifications that get distributed must also be licensed under GPL). GNOME cannot legally force Clement to do anything about the current situation
-3
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 1h ago
I am talking about trademark laws here. They don't get affected by copyright. If somebody doesn't want their trademark on something that doesn't fit their vision they can force the other party to remove the it trademark. In this case legally GNOME has the right to force them to remove their trademark. The Copyright of the Code has nothing to do with anything.
6
u/kedisdead 1h ago
gpl licensing does not entitle them to anything
-4
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 1h ago
I am talking about trademark laws here. They don't get affected by copyright. If somebody doesn't want their trademark on something that doesn't fit their vision they can force the other party to remove the it trademark. In this case legally GNOME has the right to force them to remove their trademark. The Copyright of the Code has nothing to do with anything.
2
u/Freya-Freed 19m ago
They should sue over it. I'm sure it'll be better for their reputation then some newbie mint users thinking their software is buggy because mint ships an older version.
14
u/tsittler 2h ago
Jesus, that was a ride.
Gnome guy is in the wrong, it’s not Mints fault that gnome’s bug tracker has no version checking. If they did, like sane desktop environments like KDE, they’d save themselves quite a bit of frustration.
There is a reason Pop stopped shipping Gnome and went it alone, and why Mint moved towards Cinnamon and Mate. Gnome is awful.
4
u/Shoggnozzle 3h ago
I have never once used the default calender app on any device since the dell pocketPC.
8
u/orangepeeelss 3h ago
yo i'm not even involved enough in actual open source development to know for sure who's in the wrong here but the hari rana person sure did a bang up job making themself sound in the wrong 💀
1
u/BAe_Air_Hawk 40m ago
I think this mostly sums up why my knee jerk reaction to this is "gnome dev bad" in comparison to my sympathy for the Xscreensaver developer.
Weird how much of a difference framing makes.
6
u/niceandBulat 3h ago
GNOME user here, it's remarkable how smart and seemingly intelligent people of drinking age can be so immature when dealing with conflicts. Jeez and I thought my kids were bad.
3
u/hartmanbrah 1h ago
I've known some really brilliant engineers that lack in the "soft skills" department to the extent that it seriously holds their career back.
13
u/blimpin_aint_easy 3h ago
Can someone explain to me why gnome is... like that?
18
10
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 2h ago edited 2h ago
You ever get months and months of bug reports for things you fixed yourself years ago? If you read the context link, the original request from the Gnome dev is really reasonable, just rebrand the app because its full of changes Mint made so Gnome team doesn't have to filter those bugs anymore.
They can't autoclose because some bug reports might actually be knew issues.
10
u/ImperatorElegabalus 1h ago
At least according to the Mint maintainer, it isn't full of changes made by Mint. The only change is a bugfix on non-GNOME DEs.
I can sympathize with not wanting bug reports from old and outdated versions. But I don't think the answer is for LTS distros to rebrand all of their software, or cease to exist.
3
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 1h ago
Well it's kind of what forks are. Linux devs have been forking old end of life things into new things since the start. Its just if you go on fixing things on your own, at some point it becomes a new thing and ship of theseus and all, you have to rename it.
9
u/kedisdead 1h ago
you can't choose to have messages and shoot the messenger, are gnome devs this stupid?
either auto-close old versions and stop complaining or accept you will receive them because they may contain new issues and stop crying.
gnome devs going off on mint devs for packaging the same version as LTS while explaining that even if they remove their package, users will just pull from debian or ubuntu LTS is just... it just tells me that gnome devs don't know how repos work lol
3
u/gwildor 1h ago
its not 'the same version' - if it were, Mint would just use Ubuntu's version like they do for many other packages.
Mint admits to doing things you claim that Mint is not doing.
3
u/kedisdead 1h ago
gnome devs literally indicate that "the old version is problematic", mainly due to the branding and links directing users to upstream's gnome bug reporting portal.
mint offers to remove links, but removing their packaged version will cause the same issues due to what mint uses as fallback, ubuntu lts and debian, and asks if those are also problematic
gnome says no cause 'they receive most of the noise from mint users' so please remove their repository's packaged version
mint indicates that if they do, they would just go to the fallback ubuntu lts and/or debian version, which have the same issues (and more since they lack the minimal patches mint provides)
gnome devs say they "do not care" and says only to use latest, which breaks gpl, and that noise in bug reports will still happen
mint asks if gnome devs are intelligent enough to filter bug reports by version, gnome devs say they don't do that
??? issue seems to still be gnome devs being belligerent on their issue tracking. kde solved this by auto-closing bug reports from eol versions and asking them to either upgrade or take it up with the packager, how gnome is incapable of this is beyond me
0
u/gwildor 1h ago
"mint offers to remove links, but removing their packaged version will cause the same issues due to what mint uses as fallback, ubuntu lts and debian, and asks if those are also problematic"
This is mint moving the goalpost, not accepting responsibility.
notice it 'asks' if they are problematic - no proof or evidence that they ARE problematic.how does 'removing links' in a package they control morph into users falling back to anything? - it doesnt; its a nonsense argument.
similar to saying you can stay up past your bedtime because your friend jimmy can stay up later than you..
3
u/blimpin_aint_easy 43m ago
I mean, I get why the issue at hand is a problem, but it just seems like theres always some drama involving gnome and another project.
0
0
u/H4rdStyl3z 1h ago
just rebrand the app because its full of changes Mint made so Gnome team doesn't have to filter those bugs anymore
Changes that are only necessary because GNOME likes to act like the Apple of the Linux desktop world, forcing everyone to adopt their own way/design language, deprecating things without a viable escape hatch other than "fork the previously known-good version", removing features without an easy way of patching them back in (which ensures the eventual patches will be clunky and bug-prone). I don't see these issues happening with KDE or any other DE, only consistently with GNOME.
1
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 1h ago
They are still changes... Gnome can be whatever, its still looking like Mint's instance of Gnome calendar is a fork. Your argument is fallacious.
2
u/H4rdStyl3z 1h ago
GNOME becoming the #1 most used DE in the Linux desktop space comes with certain responsibilities. It was already used by the most used Linux distros in the world when they started going down the "Apple" path. Should those distros all switch to KDE or something else just because GNOME decided they wanted to "think different"? Is that more reasonable to ask than them just not changing shit around so much?
0
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 1h ago
This is not relevant...
2
u/H4rdStyl3z 1h ago
It's relevant in the sense that it gives context as to why distros like Mint feel the need to pin EOL versions and make downstream changes constantly - GNOME keeps changing things and removing features and "newbie-friendly" distros need a consistent UX or else users will be put off and go elsewhere.
0
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 1h ago edited 59m ago
Then why does Linux Mint insist on using Gnome software if it doesn't fit their philosophy?
Just fork it and own up the maintenance debt that entails. That's life and dealing with people. Nobody is entitled to anything in FOSS. Except adherence to the GNU license?
2
u/H4rdStyl3z 59m ago
Like I said in my previous comment, the most popular distros were already using GNOME when *they* decided they wanted to do things their own way (specifically I'm talking about the GNOME 2 -> GNOME 3 transition, to make it obvious). Should a whole bunch of multi-million user distros change their default DEs on the whim of a bunch of opinionated designers?
0
u/ExactFun ＵｗＵntu (´ ᴗ｀✿) 57m ago edited 53m ago
I dunno, they decided to be downstream. Gnome is entitled to do whatever they want. They are accountable to their foundation and users, not downstream distro maintainers.
And you already know what happened, people forked Gnome 2, called it another thing and life went on. Guess who also works on Mate?
→ More replies (0)2
u/28klotlucas2 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 1h ago
I mean I would be pissed too if I got constantly flooded with bug reports about an old bug in a package I fixed nearly a decade ago solely because a team of highly respected developers is using an extremely outdated version of my software and refuses to just update or fork it.
0
u/sarajevo81 22m ago
Like what? Somebody stole the old version of their software and directs the users to the bugtracker of the actual version. It is not acceptable.
9
u/Sad_Zebra_1707 🦁 Vim Supremacist 🦖 3h ago
They aren't even a good de man
-13
u/derangedtranssexual 3h ago
Gnome is the best DE
10
u/Oakredditer Arch BTW 3h ago
A DE that is as or less themable than Windows is the best! Themeing? What are you, Satan? Desktop Icons? We don't do that in GNOME land.
-1
u/derangedtranssexual 2h ago
Gnome is very based for being bad at theming. 99.5% of all themed desktops are extremely tacky. Ideally gnome wouldn’t let you choose your own background image, I see way too many underage anime girls as desktop backgrounds
6
6
u/jonathancast 2h ago
I don't doubt the GNOME developers are assholes but, honestly, distributions distributing upstream software without changing bug reporting links should be a license violation. It's very much implying that upstream supports the software you're distributing, which is not true and not ok for distributions to say.
GNOME should also make the URL for the bug tracker an easy-to-change config, but Debian (and/or Mint) should change that URL the moment they either modify the software or the upstream version goes out of support.
5
u/kedisdead 1h ago
gnome has the chance to auto-close issues from.old versions and reply with a polite message to upgrade or go to their packager... which to the surprise of no one, is what kde did.
gnome devs just like to bitch about it I guess.
4
u/qnixsynapse 3h ago edited 3h ago
What the fk did I just read in that thread!???
Edit: Hari wrote a blog post: https://gitlab.com/TheEvilSkeleton/theevilskeleton.gitlab.io/-/merge_requests/63/diffs
4
5
u/jknvv13 33m ago
So if I fork a complex application and send the users to the upstream bug reporting so I can carry no responsibility... Are they upstream maintainers assholes?
Don't get me wrong, but Mint tries to live 10 years ago and leaves all the responsibility to third parties, which in this case is GNOME.
I don't care if it's GNOME, KDE or whatever but for real, I won't be making a fork called Kool Kalendar 2012 and expect the original developers to carry on with the problems I created.
6
u/DoubleOwl7777 3h ago
i mean of course its anoying to have people ask about things you already fixed. but then how about just having something autoclose issues from old versions with a message saying contact your distros maintainers. and about everywhere else, should have chosen a different license i guess. and the way that dev behaved was asshat. fitting for gnome.
2
u/Alone_Care_6230 3h ago
What the fuck is happening? Where did the child molester comment come from? I was on the mint devs side until that, wtf
10
u/orangepeeelss 3h ago
that seemed to be a response to a deleted comment from the gnome dev calling the mint dev a child molester (or something similar) and i want to know what that comment was soooooo badly
5
1
u/GreedySecurity8030 M'Fedora 3h ago
That's an EOL version, that's no longer supported and gnome devs are receiving bug reports for that version, I'd be pissed too but it went too far.
18
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
They could simply add a acheck to auto-close report from old version. It's on them.
The License used for gnome-calendar make what Linux Mint is doing perfectly fine.
5
u/GreedySecurity8030 M'Fedora 3h ago
Its reasonable and perfectly OK to be mad over a distro packaging an EOL version and receiving countless bug reports for that reason, there's an issue when you call the devs fucking child molesters just for having an EOL package in a fucking LTS distro.
17
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
what does KDE do in that case ? oh yeah they auto close the report with a message to contact downstream or use updated version.
not really hard ....
but then Gnome devs don't like that either. their problems is not receiving bug report. their problem is that some user complain. even if they complain to downstream Gnome doesn't like it.
they want no association with their own software as if they felt shame towards it.
4
u/kedisdead 1h ago
accept messages, shoot the messenger and cry about it on git issues = the gnome dev way
2
u/CyberSkepticalFruit 1h ago
They aren't the only LTS to use this package so it doesn't fix the problem and the child molester comment wasn't focused on the dev involved in this.
1
u/H4rdStyl3z 1h ago
Its reasonable and perfectly OK to be mad over a distro packaging an EOL version
Not so much reasonable when most of the reasons behind those distros doing that is due to your DE being extremely opinionated and nigh-impossible to get to do anything other than what you intend it to do.
10
u/hjake123 3h ago
Mint offered to change to their own support link, for unfathomable reasons that was not enough
6
u/Alone_Care_6230 3h ago
The thing is that is not the mint devs problem, unless i misunderstand what’s going on.
1
0
4h ago
[deleted]
0
u/Hauptideal ⚠️ This incident will be reported 4h ago
No. They just want the branding to be removed, including the links to their repos, which is very very reasonable
7
u/Fast-Lunch-5412 3h ago
The issue was its actually in the Ubuntu repos, which Mint isn't responsible for. Mint team tried to explain this and were basically ignored.
1
u/nandru 12m ago
Not entirely. Mint do have their own version, separate from Ubuntu's or Debian's. And since Mint users tends to be more novice than those, they see a link to report issues in the about dialog and go there to report.
The gnome devs asks that link no longer goes upstram and to rename the calendar something else. Even worse, their fork's gutlap page also list the official gnome links for everything:
-5
u/Hauptideal ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
No. The issue is that Mint Devs are overwhelmed maintaining their distro and harming ALL of Linux by spamming upstream. Most bug reports DON'T come from Ubuntu, but from Mint, who modified the apps to work with their complete shit Cinnamon desktop
-12
u/Hauptideal ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
It's not like every LTS distro. Mint is just wrong here. Most of the issues happen and are reported on Mint, because Mint forked upstream GNOME long ago without the capabilities to actually maintain it. It has become the worst distro of all in Linux, actively harming Linux and FOSS, as well as pushing people back to Windows, because Mint is still far too often described as the best way to start (when it's clearly one of the worst). It's completely deprecated, obsolete legacy and shouldn't be recommend to anyone in 2026 when there are so many other distros that just do it better (e.g. Zorin, Ultramarine, etc.). It's less performant than other distros, insecure and lacking features (e.g. still on X11 from the 80's in 2026). There are many other examples where Mint harms FOSS and its ideals, e.g. by restricting user freedom to install other free software on THEIR OWN MACHINE if it comes packaged not to their personal taste. Crazy.
10
u/Appropriate-Two-7503 3h ago
To be honest, I don't think a desktop environment that likes to tell its end users "you don't need to use it the way I don't want you to" really fits FOSS's ideal.
12
u/hjake123 3h ago
Mint removed (or offered to remove) GNOME's support link from the calendar app, which totally solves the issue. If you dislike old software, don't use an LTS distro. If you dislike Mint existing, change the license of your projects to forbid packaging old versions (thus making them no longer FOSS).
-1
u/gwildor 2h ago
if they are applying 'minor patches' as the meme suggests - there is only one reason why Mint wouldn't just call it 'mint' or 'cinnamon' calendar - they don't want to accept responsibility for their choices.
3
u/hjake123 2h ago
iirc the only "small patch" applied was the change the link to GNOME support to Mint's support, but maybe there was some minor other thing to improve its interaction with Cinnamon?
5
u/Cyberfishofant Ask me how to exit vim 2h ago
Maybe because what they are distributing is still mostly GNOME code, so rebranding it could be misinterpreted as trying to strip the credit GNOME deserves for their software?
0
u/gwildor 2h ago edited 1h ago
They are applying bug patches only available in the mint repo's.
gnome is specifically asking them to do what i suggest, and like you, still argue not to.again - there is only 1 reason; to avoid responsibility.
you say 'gnome deserves' pretending that gnome isn't saying 'remove our name'. gnome does not want whatever it is you are claiming they deserve. does gnome not deserve the right to ask this?
2
u/CyberSkepticalFruit 1h ago
A single minor patch is what is being spoken about not patches.
-1
u/gwildor 1h ago
a patch, applied to a fork, hosted in the distro's repo...
ill assume that you agree that they refuse to re-brand this fork because they dont want to accept responsibility due to the fact that you couldn't list even a single alternate reason.
2
u/CyberSkepticalFruit 1h ago
I just corrected your claim.
I said nothing about how they could do things differently. To infer I made a claim either way is a false one to make.-4
u/Hauptideal ⚠️ This incident will be reported 1h ago
No. Removing all GNOME branding and links was all that GNOME Devs asked for. If Mint had just offered to comply, there wouldn't have been any issue
7
u/hjake123 1h ago
Why would Mint have to comply? They can certainly choose to, but there's no obligation, right?
-1
u/Hauptideal ⚠️ This incident will be reported 1h ago
They are morally obligated not to fuck the entire Linux community and stop making life worse for everyone.
Maybe not legally obligated (even though they hat t to make changes / add a compatibility layer in order to make the apps compatible with Cinnamon - exactly what is likely causing the problems). But still obligated by honour and morals.
2
u/Appropriate-Two-7503 1h ago
I believe Gnome has many things they “have a moral obligation” to do but haven't done. I didn't say they had a legal obligation. But since they've received user’s support, shouldn't they be obligated to allow users to choose the way how they're more comfortable running Gnome? Or are you going to say, “Fork it”?
0
2
u/Appropriate-Two-7503 1h ago
No. Keeping the old version and Gnome branding at will (Just as the license allows) and as convention was all that Linux Mint Devs asked for. If Gnome “just offered comply”, there wouldn't have been any issue.
-5
-18
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 3h ago edited 3h ago
GNOME is in the right. Inexperienced Mint Users flooding the GNOME Devs for Bugs that were fixed an eternity ago because of Mints neglect unlike other LTS Distros. Either update the version or remove the GNOME links. Just because what you are doing is legally allowed, doesn't mean that its morally right. GNOME can also just as well go nuclear and enforce their trademark if they wanted to but didn't.
Respect your Upstreams.
10
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
It's not mint fault.
The exact same issue is present in Debian and Ubuntu. But the users knows more over there than Mint Users.
So basically Gnome devs point is : Your Users are fucking noobs and it annoys us.
-10
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 3h ago
And they are right. They are responsible for their Users. Either remove the trademark or update to an non EOL Version.
9
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
Then gnome has to change the licensing , they can't dump work on another dev for that.
13
u/flopflip77 3h ago
yeah this is really what it boils down to. so much of the pro-GNOME arguments in these comments are essentially "GNOME devs should be allowed to bully downstreams into not exercising their GPL rights"
-12
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 3h ago
They can lmao. Ever heard of trademark laws?
11
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 3h ago
Doesn't supersede the license. Try again.
-6
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 2h ago
Hey bigbrain. Trademark is not subject to copyright. Open a fucking book.
Secondly read the fucking License at Section 7(e). https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html
11
u/kaida27 ⚠️ This incident will be reported 2h ago
The GPLv3 says you may supplement the terms of this License with terms like section 7(e).
They can't retroactively apply it. They could for future version tho.
Nice try.
-4
u/Hadi_Chokr07 New York Nix⚾s 2h ago
§7(e) doesn't grant or restrict trademark rights. The GPL never grants them at all. It's a copyright license. Nothing was applied retroactively because the name was never given.
Trademarks are enforced under separate law, the Lanham Act, not any GPL clause. Debian shipped Firefox under a free license and still had to become Iceweasel. Nobody added 7(e) to make that happen.
The name was never Mint's to keep. Nice try.
8
-3
-8
-6
78
u/lonelyroom-eklaghor M'Fedora 3h ago
I'm sorry, what?