Talk:Libreboot

RfC: the primary (or only?) subject of this article

I think this is the main dispute on this talk page and AfD. It should be concluded in this RfC. I encourage people to cast their vote here:

1. The Libreboot(.org) project by Leah Rowe
2. The Libreboot.at project by GNU/FSF
3. Something else

PhotographyEdits (talk) 08:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

• Option 1: Pretty much all sources refer to this project, so this article should be primarily about that one. It should include that infobox as well, and the relevant external link. I think it is a good idea to include a section on hardware sold with Libreboot(.org) firmware. From my current understanding, no hardware with Libreboot(.at) was sold. The earliest occurrence of Libreboot.at on the Wayback Machine was March this year, the sources about hardware are older. See here. PhotographyEdits (talk) 08:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• Option 1 because that's what the article is about, and what the sources are about. So far I haven't seen any reliable independent sources about libreboot.at, and the idea that the FSF's recent fork of libreboot somehow is the same thing as libreboot which was and continues to be maintained by Leah Rowe is absurd on its face. By the way, is the lack of an RfC template intentional? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 09:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  >By the way, is the lack of an RfC template intentional?

  @Maddy from Celeste No, sorry, I just didn't lookup how to do that. PhotographyEdits (talk) 09:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  Added. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 09:46, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Maddy from Celeste Also, I think you mean libreboot.at in your original comment. PhotographyEdits (talk) 11:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  Yes indeed. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 11:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Maddy from Celeste I made some major change to the page with the quickly emerging consensus, please take a look. PhotographyEdits (talk) 12:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  Looks good; I also copied over a few sections from my own revision that I think are still useful. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:00, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

• @PhotographyEdits Option 1 per Maddy — Charles Stewart (talk) 11:25, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• Option 1; "absurd on its face" is a good way to put it. DFlhb (talk) 11:38, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• Option 1 As a longtime avid Thinkpad user I've always thought that libreboot.org should be the one and only source. Forks are allowed and can be mentioned but should take care of themselves.Triantares (talk) 12:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• Option 1: as explained earlier in the RFC and the talk page Rlink2 (talk) 15:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• Option 3: Something else: As requested several times, deeper dive into "libreboot" sources is needed, with some objectivity. The sad fact is Libreboot.org/minifree/gluglug/(osboot/Distroboot) get mostly mentioned (if that) within more significant coverage of Free Software Foundation's Respects Your Freedom certifications of hardware products sold by several companies also working towards libre booting. Can you name 3 or 4 independent, reliable sources with significant coverage of libreboot.org? -- Yae4 (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• Option 1 primary (not only): the .org project clearly is the original distribution of coreboot with this name and I don't see any evidence (since it apparently just forked in March 2023?) that the .at fork has surpassed it or even reached enough notability to have, say, its own article at Libreboot.at.(or similar name). I think it is likely the proper amount of the coverage of the laptops sold with Libreboot should be shrunk some. And the fact that the .at fork occurred can definitely be included in this article. Skynxnex (talk) 22:18, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Option 1 This is the OG. https://libreboot.at literally points to a random forum post about QubesOS v. Trisquel Greatder (talk) 10:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

sources for recent Libreboot 20230625 release

there were arguments that libreboot doesn't meet WP:GNG in the past.

i've done a release recently, via libreboot.org. i'm doing more over the coming months and probably another one soon in coming weeks. anyway, here's some coverage from google for the recent release (released on 25 June 2023):

https://goodtech.info/ce-quil-faut-savoir-sur-le-nouveau-libreboot-20230625/

https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/libreboot-20230625-gets-support-for-new-hardware/

https://www.linux-magazin.de/news/libreboot-20230625-unterstuetzt-weitere-mainboards/

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/late-night-linux-family-all-episodes/id1381229825 -- that's the podcast https://www-edivaldobrito-com-br.translate.goog/libreboot-20230625-lancado-com-suporte-a-mais-sistemas-antigos/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

https://www.linux-magazin.de/news/libreboot-20230625-unterstuetzt-weitere-mainboards/

https://alternativeto.net/news/2023/6/libreboot-releases-latest-stable-version-with-support-for-three-new-boards/

https://9to5linux.com/libreboot-open-source-bios-uefi-replacement-gets-support-for-new-hardware

https://www.omglinux.com/new-libreboot-stable-release/

https://www.getgnu.org/yazilim/libreboot-20230625-duyuruldu.html

https://www.linuxcompatible.org/story/libreboot-20230625-released/

https://www.oschina.net/news/246931/libreboot-20230625-released

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Libreboot-20230625

https://www.ilsoftware.it/libreboot-cose-e-come-funziona-il-sostituito-dei-bios-proprietari/

and that's just after like 2 minutes of googling that i found these. have fun with them. Libreleah (talk) 15:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

"Gluglug" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Gluglug has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16 § Gluglug until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

"Libiquity Taurinus" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Libiquity Taurinus has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16 § Libiquity Taurinus until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:50, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Link to dispute found. Should I place more links on this page or another page?

https://web.archive.org/web/20240320191421/https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00036.html

shows in part a user there called Leah Rowe typed about

"The Free Software Foundation recently fired a transgendered employee ofthe FSF, just for being trans, because some transphobic cissexist peoplewrote negativly about her."

Though does anyone know where to find proof that any employee was fired by the FSF just for identifying as a "trans" person?

Or that any "transphobic cissexist" wrote negativly about the fired employee.

If it was in writing, it is likely shown somewhere.

And what was the complaint that was made?

Maybe it was about something other than "being trans" that was wrote by those that Leah Rowe called "transphobic cissexist" people.

Or was the employee not fired "just for being trans" and there may have been more to what happened than what this mail shows?

If anyone knows a link to a website, document, or any other information about any dispute between the person called Leah Rowe and the Free Software Foundation it may help people find out what happened.

I did see this link on the page, but do not know if any information about a possible dispute between the person called Leah Rowe and the Free Software Foundation should be placed here or at some other page.

I do not wish to have "Misrepresentation of other people" or "personal attacks"as shown at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable

in an article, or it's references, if it is not about the page topic, though I do not know how to handle this link as it also shows information about Libreboot.

Maybe these links can also help

https://web.archive.org/web/20230610020636/https://fossforce.com/2016/09/fsf-says-firing-wasnt-discrimatory/

https://web.archive.org/web/20230610020636/https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00052.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20230528221851/https://www.fsf.org/news/free-software-foundation-statement

Though I do not know much about what happened. Maybe more information can be found to see what was typed about on each side of the dispute, if that can help improve this article, or at least Wikipedia.

I have before edited this page, and some other pages, I do not know if that means I now "declared a connection" to what I edited before. Other Cody (talk) 23:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

What section should this type of info be under?

Is it legal for companies or others to make forks or/and ship forks of Libreboot or does using the name break any Libreboot trademark, as a "Hostile fork" was typed about?

If so maybe a trademark section is needed.

I do not know what a "Hostile fork" is seeing almost all freely licensed programs, that I know of at least as of now, also let their program's name be used by others, even if the program was edited as people can just check the source code repository of the programmers or main website to see if it was from the main programmers or from others.

So maybe a criticism or controversy section about what any developers have typed?

I think programs under GPL3 can be legally forked, but maybe there are also trademarks in the name so people need to edit that name out, though Gnu Boot did change the name, to avoid problems with using that name, I think.

So should any "Hostile fork" information be put in a trademark, criticism, controversy, or other section like some other articles have, or still be in the History section?

If there are legal things with the name Libreboot a trademark section may be needed like

https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Trademark

has.

Or criticism or controversy section like some articles have?

Though I also see

https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground

But I do not know if I should have placed this in the history section, as it was typed about as a Libreboot name history thing, as Gnu Boot I think was also made near the time, or if this is more like a criticism by Libreboot developers against Gnu Boot, or something like that.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240507163502/https://codeberg.org/libreboot/lbwww/commit/83de07b6033250c5c113fd172badb0216e88ded1

I think Wikipedia is like an encyclopedia not other things, but I do not know the best way to have this information in certain sections.

Or the best way for history like things like this to be typed about on Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

Other Cody (talk) 15:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)