[ShakataGaNai]

IANAL but this change doesn't seem to make sense from any sort of "sanctions" perspective. Sure, block sanctioned countries from accessing your website or registry, etc - that makes sense. But removing providers? That doesn't seem to be related.

The thing that makes this *super* f'd up is the fact that #1 - There is no commentary from the group members explaining this or what the policy change is (the few linked TSC documents are just about registry, not about providers). #2 - There is no explanation in the PR and no linked bugs. #3 - The super vague "remove some providers" title.

It's clear OpenTofu devs were trying to slide this change in under the cover of darkness and hope no one noticed. Which makes zero sense for an OPEN source project.

You don't have to like the providers, you don't have to support them. You can even say they are actively deprecated due to the inability to test/support said providers (which totally would make sense). But just to straight out remove functional code with zero warning, notice or explanation? Super scummy.

[egamirorrim]

> Super scummy.

Kind of like what Russia's doing to Ukraine eh?

[ebcode]

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." -- Mahatma Gandhi

[yaa110]

An eye for an eye prevents further harm, so let's be sensible.

[paulcarroty]

So maybe better give Putin more hugs like Modi did? LOL.

[anone9462]

So, you are saying, OpenTofu is like Russia, and can use scummy methods. Basically, this is OK for closed dictatorship.

But there are a lot of "good" people, supporting Ukrainians, that still claiming that ClosedTofu is open source.

So, basically, it is about hypocrisy. Either you are voting that OpenTofu is same garbage as Russia, so it can use scummy things, either you are saying that OpenTofu should be open source, and this change should be reverted.

And if you saying, that OpenTofu is still open source, and do not revert that change, then, well, you are just hypocrite with low brain activity.