Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #13947 > unrolled thread

XLibre in Debian

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

Contents

  XLibre in Debian Wojciech Lipinski <wlipinski@posteo.net> - 2025-10-02 15:20 +0200
    Re: XLibre in Debian Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-10-02 18:00 +0200
      Re: XLibre in Debian Chris Hofstaedtler <zeha@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 10:40 +0200
      Re: XLibre in Debian Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 23:30 +0200
    Re: XLibre in Debian Bart Martens <bartm@debian.org> - 2025-10-02 19:00 +0200
    Re: XLibre in Debian Antoine Le Gonidec <vv221@debian.org> - 2025-10-02 22:10 +0200
      Re: XLibre in Debian Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-10-02 23:30 +0200
        Re: XLibre in Debian "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2025-10-03 00:00 +0200
          Re: XLibre in Debian Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 00:00 +0200
        Re: XLibre in Debian Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 04:10 +0200
          Re: XLibre in Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2025-10-03 07:50 +0200
          Re: XLibre in Debian Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 14:50 +0200
            Re: XLibre in Debian Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 18:40 +0200
              Re: XLibre in Debian Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 20:20 +0200
          Re: XLibre in Debian Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 18:50 +0200
            Re: XLibre in Debian Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 20:20 +0200
              Re: XLibre in Debian "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> - 2025-10-03 22:10 +0200
                Re: XLibre in Debian Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 22:50 +0200
                  Re: XLibre in Debian Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2025-10-04 02:30 +0200
        Re: XLibre in Debian Antoine Le Gonidec <vv221@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 04:10 +0200
          Re: XLibre in Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2025-10-03 07:50 +0200
            Re: XLibre in Debian Antoine Le Gonidec <vv221@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 14:50 +0200
              Re: XLibre in Debian Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> - 2025-10-03 15:20 +0200
                Re: XLibre in Debian Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-10-04 11:50 +0200
                Re: XLibre in Debian Alex <alex@puer-robustus.eu> - 2025-10-04 16:40 +0200
                  Re: XLibre in Debian Aaron Johnson <acjohnson@pcdomain.com> - 2025-10-04 23:10 +0200
                    Re: XLibre in Debian Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org> - 2025-10-05 02:30 +0200
                      Re: XLibre in Debian Aaron Johnson <acjohnson@pcdomain.com> - 2025-10-05 11:50 +0200
              Re: XLibre in Debian Antoine Le Gonidec <vv221@debian.org> - 2025-10-04 13:10 +0200
      Re: XLibre in Debian wlipinski@posteo.net - 2025-10-02 23:30 +0200
        Re: XLibre in Debian Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-10-03 10:30 +0200
    Re: XLibre in Debian wlipinski@posteo.net - 2025-10-09 14:20 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#13957

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Oct 03, 2025 at 01:48:58AM +0200, Antoine Le Gonidec wrote:
> Le Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 01:24:48PM -0700, Soren Stoutner a écrit :
> > (…) I am not accustomed to Debian categorically rejecting software 
> > that is DFSG-free from inclusion based solely on the team that develops it.
> 
> To avoid confusion: I gave *my* opinion. My opinion as a Debian
> Developer, but still I am not Debian by myself.

This was not an opinion -- just a statement.

> As for why I strongly oppose the inclusion of this software into Debian,
> I won’t go into details so suffice to say that I am not willing to let
> Debian become a Nazi bar.

Ah, details. That comes closer to an opinion, thanks.

I see how one would not want to work with some people. It is a tough
question. It seems that the XLibre developer does hold some extreme
opinions (that is their right!), but doesn't seem willing to question
them from time to time (what can be a problem when working together).

I didn't research too much about it, but found those two [1] [2] in
The Register.

This shows to me that the XLibre main developer tries to spread
borderline unscientific stuff (that mRNA from vaccines somenow
finds its way into the cell's DNA) -- but doesn't qualify for
me (yet!) as Nazi. I'd be still a bit wary of working with them.

So, Antoine, you seem to have a point, but the way you "sell" it
doesn't really help towards an informed discussion.

Cheers

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/10/xlibre_new_xorg_fork/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/11/linus_torvalds_vaccine_smackdown/
-- 
t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13962

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le Fri, Oct 03, 2025 at 07:26:50AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> (…)
> This shows to me that the XLibre main developer tries to spread
> borderline unscientific stuff (that mRNA from vaccines somenow
> finds its way into the cell's DNA) -- but doesn't qualify for
> me (yet!) as Nazi. I'd be still a bit wary of working with them.

You can for example read these:
- https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.110142.d4f30249.en.html
- https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.120415.e5f96d11.en.html

> So, Antoine, you seem to have a point, but the way you "sell" it
> doesn't really help towards an informed discussion.

I know it does not help with the discussion, but every message I post in
this thread is painting a big target on my back. I’m part of the people
the XLibre main developer and their friends would have sent to a camp,
were they given the opportunity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13964

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Quoting Antoine Le Gonidec (2025-10-03 14:11:07)
> Le Fri, Oct 03, 2025 at 07:26:50AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> > (…)
> > This shows to me that the XLibre main developer tries to spread
> > borderline unscientific stuff (that mRNA from vaccines somenow
> > finds its way into the cell's DNA) -- but doesn't qualify for
> > me (yet!) as Nazi. I'd be still a bit wary of working with them.
> 
> You can for example read these:
> - https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.110142.d4f30249.en.html
> - https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.120415.e5f96d11.en.html

I fail to see anyone in those two messages appearing as nazis (except
references to nazi Germany, historically). I do see someone whining
about CoC procedures being unfair/skewed/biased and personally I
disagree with that view.

Can someone help spell out the horror even further, because I, too, see
only a case of "urgh, I personally don't wanna spend time with that
person" and no "Debian must avoid that project".

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
 * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13973

Hi,

> > > (…)
> > > This shows to me that the XLibre main developer tries to spread
> > > borderline unscientific stuff (that mRNA from vaccines somenow
> > > finds its way into the cell's DNA) -- but doesn't qualify for
> > > me (yet!) as Nazi. I'd be still a bit wary of working with them.
> >
> > You can for example read these:
> > - https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.110142.d4f30249.en.html
> > - https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.120415.e5f96d11.en.html
>
> I fail to see anyone in those two messages appearing as nazis (except
> references to nazi Germany, historically). I do see someone whining
> about CoC procedures being unfair/skewed/biased and personally I
> disagree with that view.
>
> Can someone help spell out the horror even further, because I, too, see
> only a case of "urgh, I personally don't wanna spend time with that
> person" and no "Debian must avoid that project".

Some people were writing that Soren's questions are a "useless waste
of time", so I wanted to chime in that I think his questions seem
valid. Personally I never heard about XLibre before Wojciech's email,
despite reading LWN weekly and usually being "in the know" about FOSS
stuff. So far the two links above are the only references to an
explanation. As Jonas pointed out, it seems mostly like typical
discussion of CoCs, so who and why some are persona non grata is still
unclear to me. The inner circle of Debian might know all of this, but
regular DDs like me and Soren might have never heard about it.

However, as the topic seems sensitive, I don't expect to see this
explained on this mailing list, but rather on other forums where DDs
feel safer sharing, and I wouldn't insist on getting more replies
here.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13975

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

>> > (…)
>> > This shows to me that the XLibre main developer tries to spread
>> > borderline unscientific stuff (that mRNA from vaccines somenow
>> > finds its way into the cell's DNA) -- but doesn't qualify for
>> > me (yet!) as Nazi. I'd be still a bit wary of working with them.
>> 
>> You can for example read these:
>> - https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.110142.d4f30249.en.html
>> - https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.120415.e5f96d11.en.html
>
> I fail to see anyone in those two messages appearing as nazis (except
> references to nazi Germany, historically). I do see someone whining
> about CoC procedures being unfair/skewed/biased and personally I
> disagree with that view.

As someone socialized in Germany I feel obliged to dispute the political
harmlessness of those messages. There is more to them than whining about
CoC procedures:

1. The attempt to portray allied bombings of German cities in WW2 as a
genocide is a neo-Nazi rallying point: German Neo-Fascists
coined/usurped the term ["Bombenholocaust"][1] to portray Germans as
victims rather than perpetrators of genocide.

2. The branding of ["Gleichschaltung"][2] as a leftist concept or the
NSDAP as a leftist party is sinister cynism *at best*, but more likely
fascist doublespeak.

[1]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_(Begriff)#Bombenholocaust
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung

Quoting from one of the mentioned posts:

> Over here in Germany, anybody who talks about that, is automatically
> declared 'Nazi' by the leftists

... because they typically are.

-- 
Alex
# No gods, no masters.
# 47A5 9C45 FA69 E651 25ED 0B98 9891 FC5D 3C3C 4426

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13976

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

 From a technical perspective, XLibre appears to offer several 
contributions:
- Long-term support for X server as legacy X implementations lose 
maintenance
- Continued security patches for X11-dependent environments
- Support for users who rely on remote X applications, specific window 
managers, or accessibility workflows that aren't fully addressed by 
Wayland
- Maintained compatibility for proprietary drivers where Wayland support 
remains incomplete

What is Debian's criteria for package inclusion? I'd suggest Debian 
evaluates the software separately from the maintainer's personal views. 
Many successful FOSS projects have contributors with diverse political 
perspectives, and Debian has historically emphasized technical merit and 
community benefit.

If Debian is concerned about working relationships, it could establish 
clear technical collaboration boundaries while still making useful 
software available to users who need it. Excluding technically sound 
software based on a maintainer's unrelated public statements sets a 
precedent that could fragment the FOSS ecosystem.

What specific technical or community standards should guide package 
inclusion decisions like this?

Aaron

On 2025-10-04 09:07, Alex wrote:

> (…)
> This shows to me that the XLibre main developer tries to spread
> borderline unscientific stuff (that mRNA from vaccines somenow
> finds its way into the cell's DNA) -- but doesn't qualify for
> me (yet!) as Nazi. I'd be still a bit wary of working with them.
> You can for example read these:
> - 
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.110142.d4f30249.en.html
> - 
> https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20181010.120415.e5f96d11.en.html

I fail to see anyone in those two messages appearing as nazis (except
references to nazi Germany, historically). I do see someone whining
about CoC procedures being unfair/skewed/biased and personally I
disagree with that view.
As someone socialized in Germany I feel obliged to dispute the political
harmlessness of those messages. There is more to them than whining about
CoC procedures:

1. The attempt to portray allied bombings of German cities in WW2 as a
genocide is a neo-Nazi rallying point: German Neo-Fascists
coined/usurped the term ["Bombenholocaust"][1 [1]] to portray Germans as
victims rather than perpetrators of genocide.

2. The branding of ["Gleichschaltung"][2 [2]] as a leftist concept or 
the
NSDAP as a leftist party is sinister cynism *at best*, but more likely
fascist doublespeak.

[1]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_(Begriff)#Bombenholocaust
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung

Quoting from one of the mentioned posts:

> Over here in Germany, anybody who talks about that, is automatically
> declared 'Nazi' by the leftists

... because they typically are.



Links:
------
[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_(Begriff)#Bombenholocaust
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13977

On 10/4/25 8:32 PM, Aaron Johnson wrote:
>  From a technical perspective, XLibre appears to offer several 
> contributions:
> - Long-term support for X server as legacy X implementations lose 
> maintenance
> - Continued security patches for X11-dependent environments
> - Maintained compatibility for proprietary drivers where Wayland support 
> remains incomplete

Can we stop the charade? None of this is true. The maintainer got their 
privileges from X11 removed because they were... not a good maintainer 
and randomly broke interfaces that existing software relied upon. And 
even introduced security issues with some of their patches. And XLibre 
broke compatibility with the one proprietary driver that actually 
matters here.

Which leaves:

> - Support for users who rely on remote X applications, specific window 
> managers, or accessibility workflows that aren't fully addressed by Wayland

No-one is currently arguing for an X11 removal. I don't see how that'd 
require XLibre of all things.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13978

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> Can we stop the charade? None of this is true. The maintainer got
> their privileges from X11 removed because they were... not a good
> maintainer and randomly broke interfaces that existing software
> relied upon. And even introduced security issues with some of their
> patches. And XLibre broke compatibility with the one proprietary
> driver that actually matters here.

Even if these occurrences are true, I would consider them nothing more 
than growing pains and hardly technical reasons to exclude a project 
from Debian packaging.

I suppose it will take time, but if XLibre carries the FOSS X server 
torch moving forward, folks will likely want it for these technical 
reasons.

On 2025-10-04 19:47, The Wanderer wrote:

> On 2025-10-04 at 19:46, Philipp Kern wrote:
> 
> On 10/4/25 8:32 PM, Aaron Johnson wrote:
> 
> From a technical perspective, XLibre appears to offer several
> contributions:
> - Long-term support for X server as legacy X implementations lose
> maintenance
> - Continued security patches for X11-dependent environments
> - Maintained compatibility for proprietary drivers where Wayland
> support remains incomplete
> Can we stop the charade? None of this is true. The maintainer got
> their privileges from X11 removed because they were... not a good
> maintainer and randomly broke interfaces that existing software
> relied upon. And even introduced security issues with some of their
> patches. And XLibre broke compatibility with the one proprietary
> driver that actually matters here.

I would be interested in references for this. I do not doubt that it is
true, but the only reference I've seen thus far which might have gone
into detail about technical inadequacies of the XLibre maintainer(s)
goes through a Website which blocks access from the browser I use on my
primary computer (for site-security reasons, because that browser is
severely outdated - it's a long story, I'm working towards changing that
but it won't be soon).

> Which leaves:
> 
>> - Support for users who rely on remote X applications, specific
>> window managers, or accessibility workflows that aren't fully
>> addressed by Wayland
> 
> No-one is currently arguing for an X11 removal. I don't see how
> that'd require XLibre of all things.

I parse the idea as being something like "because Xorg has been
declared unmaintained or similar upstream, it will inevitably bitrot and
become more and more broken over time, so it will cease to be a viable
option; in order for X to continue to be viable, it will be necessary
for distributions to switch to a new upstream; the only current
candidate for an alternative X upstream which has enough contributor
interest to seem potentially viable is XLibre". Thus the "as legacy X
implementations lose maintenance" bullet point, above.

There are probably multiple unacknowledged assumptions in that, and I
don't know how many of them I could even pull out and make explicit, let
alone how many of them have any validity. I do, however, think that
that's the argument.

To be clear: from what I do know about it at my remove, I am not in
favor of XLibre, do not intend to touch it with a ten-foot pole (despite
being wedded to a window manager which will never get Wayland support,
and to at least one X feature which Wayland AFAIK explicitly does not
support), and would prefer for Debian to not be involved with it either.
I do not, however, even pretend to have any say or sway in that last.

Aaron

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13974

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> I know it does not help with the discussion, but every message I post in
> this thread is painting a big target on my back. I’m part of the people
> the XLibre main developer and their friends would have sent to a camp,
> were they given the opportunity.

Just so the kind of people involved in XLibre is made more obvious:
I already started to get threatening e-mails from them following the
couple messages I sent to this mailing list.

This is the kind of behaviour that would be encouraged by any DD working
on or sponsoring work related to XLibre.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13952

Dear Antoine

Thank you for the response. Are there plans to release a clear official
statement from the Debian Project regarding their position related to
XLibre, including the rationale, to inform the free/libre software community?

Best wishes
Wojciech



On 2025 Oct  2  20:03, Antoine Le Gonidec wrote:
>Le Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 01:07:43PM +0000, Wojciech Lipinski a écrit :
>> I would like to ask if there are any plans to include XLibre (fork of X11) in Debian. (…)
>
>I strongly oppose the inclusion of XLibre or any related tool in Debian.
>Or, for what it’s worth, the inclusion of anything developed by that team.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13960

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 07:46:34PM +0000, wlipinski@posteo.net wrote:
>Dear Antoine
>
>Thank you for the response. Are there plans to release a clear official
>statement from the Debian Project regarding their position related to
>XLibre, including the rationale, to inform the free/libre software community?

Unlikely.


-- 
WBR, wRAR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#13982

Dear Debian Project Team

Thank you for your responses, especially to those who have provided
information about the proper channels to request specific packages
or hinted to the development situation with display protocols under GNU/Linux.

My question about XLibre resulted from the current, not quite satisfactory
situation, with display protocols for GNU/Linux. As a non-IT person
who is involved in development of specialized simulation software
(solar energy engineering), I feel uncertain about investing my time
in solutions compatible with X11 or with Wayland. While X11 is loosing
its support base, the slow progress with Wayland implementation makes
me think to explicitly separate any graphical interface from the
computing cores by depending on third-party free/libre software
for visualization.

Debian GNU/Linux is a fantastic distro, which has been my main workhorse
for years. Please never allow to divide the community. Extreme language
on any side of the spectrum is not helpful to work harmoniously.
Some political aspects raised in response to my post are personally
not neutral to me, a Pole, either. I believe that the past of some big tech
companies, now involved in FOSS through their subsidiaries, or strong personal
opinions of free software developers on any side of the political spectrum,
are best dealt with by focusing on the philosophy behind the free/libre
software movement.

Thank you for your excellent and very meaningful work.

Best wishes
Wojciech

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web