[waych]

Wow what abusive behavior!

Just because a tool is OSS doesn't mean it will be community driven, and it also doesn't mean the publisher is subservient to the community's whims. OSS just means you have options when you are done with the publisher.

The irony is that the whining is support for M1. If this was about running on something less proprietary than Apple maybe I would sympathize more.

Signal is a great product. I just sent them a donation in response to the disgusting behavior witnessed.

[quyleanh]

Totally agree with this.

Someone even say they have donated for a year, and will not donate until their demand is fulfilled.

Donation is voluntary. It's not a tool for demand the interest or forcing people fulfill request.

[ekianjo]

> Just because a tool is OSS

Signal is only Open source by name, as they don't authorize anyone to make their own clients. FOSS is about power to the end users, and Signal is fighting hard against it.

[waych]

It's opensource by license.

Nobody has to be "authorized" to do anything with code shared. That's not how the licenses work.

> FOSS is about power to the end users, and Signal is fighting hard against it.

"power" here means the ability to derive your own forks (see https://github.com/dennisameling/Signal-Desktop).

Being OSS doesn't mean they have to be fully transparent on their plans, nor does it mean they have to cave to abusive behavior in PRs, feature requests or forums.

[viccuad]

> OSS just means you have options when you are done with the publisher.

Except that with signal you don't have options as they only allow their signed clients.

[waych]

The fact that client binaries are signed doesn't mean you can't use your own client. It means you can't make your own binaries and pretend they were from Signal.

You aren't suggesting that Signal share their code signing key are you?