Well? Leah had done quite astonishing things in the past, but this one does not count into. Personally I won't trust her or use any other newer release of Libreboot. The reasoning is simple with a concrete look onto the last actions Leah had done: https://www.andrewrobbins.info/libreboot.html

And again Leah is mixing up her personal views onto social constructs into the project: The news to be linked has included the part (quote) "Codes of conduct are stupid". Long story short: No they are not and stating this makes it even more worse. Once the Libreboot-project had a democratic organization behind. Of course talks between members of the project can be difficult, especially when it goes this way. But just changing everything without any further transparency? Okay: Not the nice way to go and not the way I will ever accept a project in this dimension. Regarding the "Code of Conduct": There would have been seriously quite many options, but the worse one is not to create anything like a ruleset to welcome others and instead also doing the comparable the same now as Leah is stating something about Coraline Ada Ehmke without any further sources. Thanks, but no, Libreboot! I don't accept toxic behaviour and I don't adapt "news" made personal like some blog-posting on a project-website without any further possibility getting into the perspective.

I've stated once and quite a long time that Libreboot is not dead and there is work done into the repositories. But for now I'll state: Libreboot is now really a dead project just consisting of literally one person. Whenever Leah is in trouble or loosing interest there will be no further take onto Libreboot. So in the end it turns out even more bad! Yes, there was no further release for a long period. But if this is the price getting all others out? Well, thanks but I'll stay on Coreboot then and of course: The older release when the project was oriented towards democratic principles, with a code of conduct and with welcoming people. To be also fair, here is the perspective of Leah about resignations: https://libreboot.org/news/resignations.html

Very much drama from my point of view and I can understand Andrew Robbins absolutely: The second time everything is changed and rewritten again, coming also up from Leah herself again. Well? No trust into this action and therefore also not in Libreboot as project. There is no team behind that and the last persons left are no longer part of this. And again: Free, libre hardware had become quite smaller. Yes, this is Leah's project and it started this way. So she can keep the upcoming release and also the sources! She wants to be in charge to produce a fast new release? Do it and keep Libreboot. It's a pity but the project won't recover on this way and I think the same as Andrew Robbins. Perhaps there will be a fork? Again with a democratic organization? With a clear including ruleset - no need to call this one way or another, but when there is nothing some people tend to go just wild with meritocratic principles being so much forgiving about harassment and hatred. Do more for the "project", being the person everything and everyone depends on? Okay, you can do just anything without further consequences. But hey: "Codes of conduct are stupid"? Of course they are if you have to reflect on your own behaviour towards others. Absolutely inacceptable to remove democratically-governed basics and nevertheless stating to be for freedom is a bad joke!

As you asked for OSBoot: Coming up from the same person, also developed only of interest from the same person, with the same principles as Libreboot was adapted now - strange, as the project itself was started as Retroboot once and was clearly announced as another take from Leah to give back changes to the Libreboot-project (as Andrew Robbins stated) - the same as for Libreboot from now on as long as Leah Rowe is again in charge for the project. Your second question about memtest86+: Ask for this within the IRC, perhaps Leah knows a solution for this. Yeah, sounds quite bitter now from my side but again another disappointment. Seems happening quite often these days and I cannot understand why giving up an emancipated structure for a project like this. But the x86-platform is damaged up to be completely useless freedom-wise. So all in all? Just for the records: https://notabug.org/osboot/osbmk/issues … ment-23279

To quote:

Interesting to have this written in the public, in the third person without participation of the person being mentioned and talked about. The rest is up to everyone on any individual level as I don't want to get some kind of angry, just being disappointed about the behaviour. And another quote from the posting about resignations:

We'll see about that, Leah. I don't trust your actions as you have profen yourself not being really trustworthy: Communication is a key point and it seems you have not done this with the other team-members which is causing damage being not repairable anytime soon. And:

Gitlab is not trustworthy and there are enough alternatives like Gitea, Sourcehut or even the version of Gogs notabug is using. But in the end the own decision will be always "right" and "correct" as the article is ending there, of course also with "best wishes" for other distributions of Coreboot done by the now ex-members. Quite a "style", not the best one indeed and not transparent in any way!

Hey zapper,

thanks for the feedback.
I think I'll look towards the new release coming up and especially the time beyond. Speaking about that: We'll see what's next and that's the point as I'm afraid there are not that much people left being into the development of Libreboot. As I've noted: Leah has done outstanding things and of course this will never be part for me to judge about. But her concurrent behavior is leaving me here with questions especially when it comes towards a "Code of Conduct". I'm collecting therefore alternatives as there are so many of them and try to send them later on. One example is even the Hyperbola Social Contract itself as it is a ruleset on how a community wants to communicate with each other, based on empathy and solidarity, helping each other without any kind of prejudices. Leah said in the article about "new release upcoming" that she don't want adapt the one ruleset from Coraline Ada Ehmke. That's okay as there are many others or you could write down your complete own (again the one for Hyperbola). But she did even more as to reject any ruleset itself with a generalized message and that's the point I'd like to address for now in the upcoming days first.

It's not about me to judge or decide what to do with Libreboot, but I find her steps very harsh and to reading the others like Andrew Robbins makes me sad. I'll see what Leah is up to from the release itself, but for now she is not that kind of trustworthy for me, because there was no stable release for OSBoot also. My thoughts are therefore on the one hand towards the team members left outside and on the other hand also towards Leah herself as she should not engage in too much and is burning down her own engagement, to focus more. Would be otherwise even more worse if both projects and Leah have afterwards problems - besides my own decision about Libreboot for now. All in all the complete situation is really bad!

And yes: I have written down my absolute initial thoughts here, also to reflect about them. It's absolutely okay getting criticism, feedback is welcome. That's my point: The community-aspect as we as earthlings need it and projects could get more out of it by the community for the community.

Addendum: Did a little search for Coraline and her postings. Here is more: https://where.coraline.codes/blog/
And also here: https://postmeritocracy.org/
Well it seems this is the generic problem itself and the missing will to do some self-reflection being part of many people into working on "open-source". So again: The criticism coming up from Leah is not understandable from my side as neither myself nor anybody else here have her thoughts heard or her sources she had to come to this conclusion. A Code of Conduct is nothing more than the official statement to be fair for everybody, having ethical standards and also into empathy and solidarity. The base for any humanistic approach. No need to adapt only the one from Coraline, other possibilities found everywhere. But life is not about making jokes throughout the cost of others: If someone is using own freedom to restrict others dignity the freedom comes to a complete stop, immediately. Otherwise we talk about discrimination and disgusting actions coming up with using real discrimination done towards people (prominent example from some "open-source" communities doing jokes with ableism, sexism, transphobic and homophobic wordings, when criticized they instead do victim-blaming). Not "cool" in any kind, therefore inclusion to exclude hatred and defining people only towards what they call "knowledge workers". Meaning: You know more, you are more "valuable" than others.
From my concurrent perspective written as I know this problem for a long time: Fascist behaviour is not that easy to define, but it's not to draw a line for exclusion of toxic behaviour otherwise there would be never a line made for justice as a system. It's a complex problem, but it's way too easy defined from technical groups when just using deterministic approach. Technology is and will always be political as everything else. Standing up for humanism is a must, otherwise society fail in one point or another! And no support from my side for projects or individuals to decline humanistic values, empathy and solidarity besides the point that I don't have accept everyhing what Coraline says or writes. It is her point of view. More sources incoming therefore from Libreboot-git: https://notabug.org/libreboot/libreboot … 02104xx.md

To quote:

I don't go on with the language, just with the criticism: So it is about the "Ethical License"-topics and the corresponding way being "not free software". Well? Again a complex problem. Perhaps not to solve throughout licensing as Coraline is trying to do. But that's no "monster", just another decision, good or bad is up to the situation itself: It's a tryout and the license can be developed in time. Just a sidenote: Some even don't recognize something as free when capitalism is excluded, but that's some little Whataboutism and has no further place here, only for demonstration on how complex our society was, is and will be. Would be simple to reject "Ethical Licenses" because of being not free, no problem with this and stay true for a ruleset or choose another. The worst step is to change the complete structure away from democratic organization, back towards meritocratic principles where only individuals have respect when they are "knowledge-workers".

To demonstrate the point of complexity: Mastodon had its own problem when Gab entered the space and did a fork of the Mastodon-project. For the people not knowing Gab: Long story short that's a so-called anti-social platform with "ultimate free-speech", where fascists can post whatever they want. So what was done? Many instances blocked Gab and the concurrent infrastructure as also instances in communication with Gab itself. Also some clients blocked Gab within the source-code itself. A line was drawn, was it correct? Until today there are conflicts about that and Coraline tries to address this with another way. Is this correct? Well, I see her point, but I think the license itself is problematic in the conccurrent state and many issues arise when authors can drawback the usage - point made by Leah. But here is the point in question: Better to get in contact with people, writing down thoughts and this doesn't make other thoughts about ethical standards and communities automatically wrong because Coraline has written them down. That's complexity, cannot be declared that easy and deterministic. Only because I understand computers (being exactly: personal computers) I don't fully and always understand social interaction and any situation done again with the same persons under the same circumstances can lead to other results (just one participant have a bad night and sleep is enough)! Just as more to read about the paradoxon of tolerance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

"Tolerating the intolerant will lead to destroy tolerance itself!" (done in short, just as demonstration about the problem mentioned)

In the end I can choose how I oppose intolerance: The worst to ignore it, meaning tolerating it. One possibility to draw a line with rulesets. Behave incorrect, insulting others? Well, time to go while always the possibility is open to use the software of course. The way Coraline is using now - that's the criticism I see from Leah - lead the other way around and can become even worse. For sure a correct point. But regarding the wording "monster" a quote now:

That's another point of complexity: We earthlings learn from our experiences. Too much negative experiences can lead exactly into the "abyss". And of course I have no exact solution on this. But what I have learned in my life until today is that addressing this is one of the most important things. Otherwise we have darkest moments coming up, we had them in the past and we will have them when we are not able to address them. (The quote above is an excerpt from Nietzsche about "fighting monsters". As when you fight them, you should look towards not becoming like them onto this way! Meaning there are things not to do because just to stop some individual or some group, based on the situation also breaking human rights and essential life. But this is also a warning: Seeing into the dark, being always confronted with hatred comes up with a price to pay and not everyone has a choice getting out this viscious circle - double meaning from both sides. Our global society fails to recognize this major problem when people are confronted with hate because they look different, behave something different or talk different, have different perspectives. People are hated and excluded, they learn to defend themselves, more and more. Getting away from hatred is also to give those people first a way to address their heart and soul instead of excluding them and so feeding the monstrosity our society is up to: Being welcome and inclusive with clear principles against intolerance and hatred. And yes: In some parts and communities you are confronted with hatred because you are up to humanism. What kind of society is this tolerating it?)

No problem at all with defending Mr. Stallmann. But the problem is: HOW Leah is using now the Libreboot-project doing this. The last times those messages were used to criticize the FSF and making some annotations about the TALOS2-systems. I don't think it is correct to use the Libreboot-project as messageboard as this is mixing the perspectives. When searching for the concurrent situation you can find so many different perspectives, there are even some messages about Mr. Stallman and his way to treat the people at the FSF - no further details. I cannot verify anything here and that's also not really my intention. I don't think anybody is inherently evil in this situation or something in this way, so also not Richard Stallman. And Leah is using the expression "we in Libreboot", which is making the situation even more questionable as there is no "we" left. In fact she accuses others being "inherently evil" as "they" (persons) want to "infiltrate projects", that's the definition of doing something with intention and that's the point everything is around by those false accusations (more details later in this posting).

The point is now: The FSF and parts of the community around have some major issues ignored within decades and it is time to reflect about this. That's for sure. The last actions about getting Mr. Stallman back aboard were also not that kind of transparent - speaking about all the members within the FSF itself as this decision was made without them. All in all: The desaster is complete, the damage taken and in that really strange situation it is better to hold still and help getting the facts more inline. There is my criticism at Leah and her lead now for Libreboot: She can take any position she wants. But mixing all this into some "evil plans" for "others to infiltrate free software projects" to "abolish free speech" is the argumentation for me to take the door outside and waiting. Those are viewpoints giving some people the right doing even more harm attacking others (looking into the abyss) and those false accusations condemn humanism or just the tryout doing something for a change is condemned - leads again towards the named ignorance above for decades creating a toxic environment and excluding everyone not fitting into the meritocratic picture. Life is not functional on that level: "Never change a running system" is a phrasing for machines, for deterministic systems like the computer itself, not for social interaction. If we were inbound on that level, nothing won't change ever again, nothing for the better and for hope. This also condemns all the work so many had done for free culture, for free and libre soft- / hardware itself, because it is also a hope for social change, will be ever the same to get people thinking for themselves, being true towards their own and others at the same, no masquerade.

Please don't get me wrong here: I'm really interested having nobody harmed, so Mr. Stallman and Leah as everybody else. This desaster is so complex: Even some management team members resigned (https://www.fsf.org/blogs/executive-dir … -resigning). The situation has to be cleared, but this won't happen by defending someone. This should have been done 2019 and not 2021 with argumentations coming also up from questionable sources (naming DistroTube for example). That's not the way a project like Libreboot should be positioned as this is causing damage without any team behind to get this right and only Leah to bear all of it. Not good, as this "defending at any cost" can also result into the complete destruction of the FSF, the "free software"-movement and Libreboot!
It's just the point that there were mistakes and failures made, reflections were ignored, even individuals with good intentions harmed with death threats in the past. Ignoring this further leads only deeper into the dark, better to stay away from those and keep true to values and positive approaches.

By the way: Having people put the foot into the mouth or something else, no problem. Or singing and making music about "Hackers". Really, I find this especially just harmless and smile, just with respect. If we would talk about that only, there would be no problem.

In the end I don't see another solution as to wait, not hoping to get the situation even more complicated as it is by now. The messages and posting from Leah are not helpful, instead there are accusations towards others without any further base. Well, that's the problem as Andrew Robbins noted earlier:

Not speaking about me as everybody has an own bridge, but I find this all more than irritating and harmful for individuals and the perspective for free soft- and hardware, also Leah herself in the end. That's my point to avoid Libreboot and stay outside for now. Even though: It seems more important defending Richard Stallman from the project itself instead of building the project. But it's her decision and hers alone, as it is mine to state that Libreboot won't live longer when this course is used. I would be happy if I'm wrong onto this, really. Nevertheless: For me the project is inacceptable when using such phrasing, such sources and perspectives including hateful conspiracies. That's not my picture of free culture, including all beings. It's more about excluding everyone not fitting into some defined "group", even more also some "cult" defined (no, just a warning, not my intention to compare this directly). Now the entry states "Richard Stallman is OUR hero". Well, thanks but no: Not my hero and I decline those exaggerations complete, because I don't want to run after some names or leader positions, no need doing so and when doing you won't be able to recognize failures as they are part of every being, nobody is free from mistakes or failures. Mr. Stallman is a human being done outstanding things and a gift for many, therefore my respect as I respect also other beings. But I don't want to take the thread here more into off-topic. My criticism towards Libreboot stays and I'm happy with the current (older) stable-version to use, will stay there for future devices as this was done with a democratic organization, not with this. And I won't accept the points Leah made as they are not reasonable, just some pure accusations without facts. There was a time to collect facts in 2019 for Richard Stallman leaving the FSF and if this was wrong, time is over and defending intransparency and secret votings is the complete opposite of freedom, that's for sure. Sidenote: Richard Stallman had also a talk at Microsoft, in front of their logo. Showing also how different it can be: If the "hero"-figur is doing this and others doing the same. Just saying, therefore better to stay true instead defending at any cost and damaging a needed value for technical emancipation (free software)!

Well, a deblobbed Coreboot with selected and modified payload (Seabios or Grub) is good though. Also the freedom to stay at some point and version is important - especially when this is about no further CVEs to be fixed. Yeah, could be of course a risk, but otherwise better switching from Libreboot to Coreboot as I've said: Trust is gone completely. The rest will be shown in the future. Leah lost interest more than once and now she has two projects to manage, not only one - which would be just enough. Perhaps somebody creates a fork? But swiftgeek or and_who have understandable wounds to heal. Alyssa left Libreboot and is into working on graphics drivers - and writing wonderful, interesting articles about free soft- and hardware: https://rosenzweig.io/blog/software-fre … power.html.

Besides all of that: Libreboot as name will be more or less something from the past when following the news. Just a name for OSBoot-libre!
So I stick towards Coreboot, using information from other sources to compile this without firmware-blobs. The rest stands for me: Her words, her attacks towards others, her really bad behaviour and her course to take away the democratic structure with pointing fingers on the former team-members (didn't even mention that until now, but clear to read).

No thanks! Better to reference mine with libre Coreboot for the future when talking and writing about. Sounds good so far.
Reference here: https://forums.hyperbola.info/viewtopic … 2844#p2844
With a big THANK YOU towards you, zapper. I'll take this to update and build my own infrastructure onto this with Coreboot-libre. A conclusion to show also: Libreboot was a good idea, proven worthy so far until now as it is going down towards individual interests nobody knows except few people. But that's no problem: It is free software and so the community can take it from here. That's emancipation, nothing to do with revenge-campaigns as Leah and some others want to do now!

Hey, interesting idea. Trying out to get both onto the repository. Perhaps they want to help and Libreboot stays alive, not only as name?
We'll see about that. Yeah, it's a pity about Alyssa, but she has reached good development on other parts. Don't giving up hope, even if I'm disappointed in some ways: I wish Leah only she could have another look onto her actions within this time as she had done in the past.

We should not mention further apologists and demagogues for far-right (and beyond) ideas. The point is that our world is very complex and there will be never any kind of deterministic approach explaining something that way. A computer is deterministic, software can be also that (depending on size), but social interaction never. Democratic values are something we need to defend every day again. Talking about and reflect ourselves, but also criticize if things get out of bounds and taking action for empathy and solidarity. Hyperbola is oriented onto that, as our social contract concludes within.

Technology was and is never free from ideology, otherwise we would not be here for free soft- and hardware. Even to have no ideology is in fact an ideology.
And we won't be able to defend democracy with hearing out demagogues proposing to throw away science and facts. Those are the best we have for sure with having things like peer-reviews for example. Complexity within social interaction but with clear values, for technology including more simplicity per definition as our social interaction is complex enough and our complete universe is for sure so big we only can understand it all together and no one alone. And for sure a global society, where individuals count and care for another. An utopian view? Yes. Unreachable? Well, depends. Perhaps I will never see this world, but I dream of it and free soft- and hardware not going onto that way need for sure a fork at minimum (talking about Libreboot).

EDIT: Just to add as I read through again ... by stating "not mention apologists and demagogues for far-right (and beyond)" I meant only here in this thread. For sure there is need to analyze and inform about tactics and progression of anti-democratic movements. The best way is never to talk with fascists and only about them. But better not in this thread here as this would bring the focus away and besides Leah has for sure her own problems and ... well, questionable thoughts at minimum.

Okay, perhaps I should take this more clearly now and let me state that: I won't ever get into anything Luke Smith is engaged into and I don't wish to get into his spaces as I also don't wish to further go with something he has ever created. That's my point: And services created are included within. There is no mixing up. When a person is going with alt-right theories and thoughts, then the red line was and is crossed. There is and will be no discussion point onto that for me as we can absolutely see where this ends from history.

The naming-scheme is already coming from alt-right spheres (Chad), the very special reasoning behind that will be left out from me for this moment. And there is no way you will be ever being able to make any difference between the policital engagement of Luke Smith and this website mentioned. Also clear statement from me here: There is nothing good within, any point. No mixing up besides I also criticize Leah clearly for her actions and her viewpoints. But I won't compare both persons, because of also clear differences between them. The best state for me is staying away from both, as far as I even can. That is the concrete point without any further discussion into that, neither with people with questionable motivation for clear disgusting viewpoints (Luke Smith) nor with egoistic or further very market-radicale engagement to harass and manipulate others for the own position (Leah). And the article linked last is a absolute fitting description for a problem called Paradox of tolerance.

Disagreement from my side: You cannot make a difference between the engagement of Mr. Luke Smith, his statements and his actions including the content he is sharing because all of that is directing into one special direction. It is called political dog-whistle and that's all of his engagement, his content shared and his writings, statements. And besides there are enough other sites to be used. To list only a few:

https://github.com/awesome-selfhosted/a … selfhosted
https://gitlab.com/prism-break/prism-break

As said: That's my last and final statement onto that for my point, again with the renewal that we have for sure other things to do as to debate about apologists and demagogues. People first stating pure harassment and afterwards meaning that this was just "satire" or something else don't need anyone listening. They need just ignorance, no tolerance in any way. Yes, this is harsh and hard. But I have enough experiences made with discussions or trying to do that. When someone is listening and it is a reasonable debate, fine and okay. As stated: Everyone needs to reflect. But people in that spheres Mr. Luke Smith is in, have no interest in reflections. They use all of that for their own stage, first writing down their hatred as "critical thinking" and afterwards they make exactly what they even first said, ending all in cruel deeds and suffering. No space for them from me, no further time to listen only just one more line. I hope that clears also up my position.