If there's one thing you can always count on in the Linux world it's that packaging can be a nightmare. The OBS Studio team are not happy with the Fedora folks due to Flatpak problems and threatened legal action.
Like with traditional distribution packages (RPM, DEB, etc), distros can also run their own Flatpak repositories, instead of using Flathub. This is what Fedora does by default, they have their own Fedora Flatpaks, where they often repackage various software. To note: the OBS Studio on Flathub, is an official OBS package.
A few weeks ago Joel Bethke of the OBS Studio team put up an issue on the Fedora Flatpaks GitLab titled "Broken OBS Studio Flatpak presented as official package" that said:
The unofficial OBS Studio Flatpak on Fedora Flatpaks is, seemingly, poorly packaged and broken, leading to users complaining upstream thinking they are being served the official package. There are several examples of this being the case outside of OBS Studio as well, and many users who are unhappy with Fedora Flatpaks being pushed with no or unclear options to opt-out.
- https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-software/-/issues/2754
- https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/463
We would like to request that this package is either removed, or made clear that it is a third party package. It should not be upstream's responsibility to ensure downstream packages are working, especially when they overwrite official packages.
I would also like some sort of explanation on why someone thought it was a good idea to take a Flatpak that was working perfectly fine, break it, and publish it at a higher priority to our official builds. We spend an enormous amount of effort on our official Flatpak published to Flathub to ensure everything is working as well as it can be.
Thanks in advance.
This led to a issue being filed on Fedora Workstation titled "Deprioritize or remove Fedora Flatpaks, and prioritize Flathub in GNOME Software". The issue noted receiving complaints from upstream developers, like the OBS Studio team. With lots of discussion going on about changing the order of how Fedora presents packages between Fedora Flatpaks, Flathub and RPMs. Inside the comments, there's a fair bit of disagreement between Fedora / Red Hat and the OBS Studio team.
Then on the 12th of February, Bethke escalated things with a reply on the original ticket:
Since it's clear that Fedora does not have any interest in a rational discussion at this point, and has decided to resort to name-calling, we are now considering the Fedora Flatpaks distribution of OBS Studio a hostile fork.
This is a formal request to remove all of our branding, including but not limited to, our name, our logo, any additional IP belonging to the OBS Project, from your distribution.
Failure to comply may result in further legal action taken. We expect a response within the next 7 business days (By Friday, February 21st, 2025).
Thank you.
Since then the Fedora team have updated their Flatpak of OBS Studio to an "end of life" status, and eventually it looks like it will be removed, so things seem to be moving into a direction that should appease the OBS Studio team.
A messy situation but hopefully one some lessons can be learned from.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
They are just reinventing the wheel...
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/tutorial-how-to-replace-the-fedora-flatpak-repo-with-flathub/44320
That's an interesting take on the FOSS freedoms.@BlackBloodRum freedom to copy, freedom to use, freedom to modify, freedom to read, but not freedom to imitate the original dev.
If they were to take this to court it would be a trademark conflict, which is something essentially all free software licenses maintain(the gpl is explicit. Others just don't touch the subject.)
This is often used to combat phishing campaigns, build trust and theoretically make money from open source development.
I can't find the "quote this post" button anymore.
That's an interesting take on the FOSS freedoms.harming the reputation was never part of the deal, you can redistribute floss software, but you cant do an malicious fork and use it to harm the reputation of such software, in this case its not an malware but its using the OBS brand and harming it.
i'm glad someone finally found an way to fix this kinda of issue.
I can't find the "quote this post" button anymore.me neither
Last edited by elmapul on 14 Feb 2025 at 2:53 pm UTC
I would like to remind everyone that Fedora is a big project, largely comprised of volunteers. There are a lot of things going on at once. We can't always make decisions instantly, and reporting an issue to one special interest group isn't raising it with the whole project. It's not really fair to assume that we're not interested in a reasonable discussion, and it seems very quick to jump to nuclear-level threats. Could we please deescalate the drama? I'm sure everyone wants what's best for both projects and for our users.A project which is not able to maintain their application should really not threaten others with a lawsuits:
Semi-offical statement from Fedora
Uses an end-of-life runtime
The runtime used by this app is no longer receiving security updates
Fenrirthviti (Security analyst, coder, tinkerer. Member of OBS Project) on Dec 24, 2024What a joke!
We will update when we've verified the packages don't cause regressions.
Thank you.
*shrugs in Debian* Quoting died because of the incomprehensibly stupid UK Online Safety Act, along with the forum, user uploaded avatars and other things.
I can't find the "quote this post" button anymore.Liam has already posted why the button isn't there anymore, along with the forum being removed, and it has to do with the UK's new Online Safety Act.
Last edited by ToddL on 14 Feb 2025 at 3:33 pm UTC
Seems like a legit and so simple request; I wonder what has been the problem in fulfilling it.
A project which is not able to maintain their application should really not threaten others with a lawsuits:
I think I'd much rather that the maintainers maintain the application in a functional state, instead of doing a Fedora and putting it onto a runtime version where it doesn't work.
Of note, the issues in the runtime that prevent OBS from working should be fixed soon, it's waiting on patches upstream.
@BlackBloodRum freedom to copy, freedom to use, freedom to modify, freedom to read, but not freedom to imitate the original dev.Indeed but, if they did not want people repacking the software and redistributing it with the branding intact, they should have made this clear from the get-go that it was not permitted, as opposed to waiting until the software had been redistributed with the branding. Just like RedHat do, they make it very clear you must not redistribute with the logo's.
If they were to take this to court it would be a trademark conflict, which is something essentially all free software licenses maintain(the gpl is explicit. Others just don't touch the subject.)
This is often used to combat phishing campaigns, build trust and theoretically make money from open source development.
Last edited by BlackBloodRum on 14 Feb 2025 at 5:22 pm UTC
Indeed but, if they did not want people repacking the software and redistributing it with the branding intact, they should have made this clear from the get-go that it was not permitted, as opposed to waiting until the software had been redistributed with the branding.
They said in the post that they don't have problems with redistribution, fedora also redistribute an RPM package and they don't have problem with that because it works, also the license say that you can't redistribute the trademark they just allow it in good faith
Cool, more Fedora things that are so Fedora that only Fedora could manage it. *shrugs in Debian*
The distro that couldn't use Firefox for a long time and had to rename it to iceweasel?
The distro that couldn't use Firefox for a long time and had to rename it to iceweasel?And the one that pissed off the KeepassXC devs by suddenly disabling a bunch of features.
And the one that pissed off the bcachefs devs by building with incorrect, broken dependencies.
It's a tad ironic.
They said in the post that they don't have problems with redistribution, fedora also redistribute an RPM package and they don't have problem with that because it works, also the license say that you can't redistribute the trademark they just allow it in good faithEven so, a blanket policy would be better. Either allow it, or don't. Choosing who can or cannot use your branding in FOSS selectively after they have begun redistributing it just causes more hassle than it's worth since anyone who wishes to redistribute may suddenly find themselves in a situation of having to remove it or be sued.
Redistributors shouldn't have to fear that the project might suddenly come along and revoke their right to redistribute it with the branding, knowing in advance whether it is permitted is better.
Fedora didn't do this with malicious intent, or with intent to harm the project - they merely redistributed it in their own flatpak. (functionality problems aside, that is all that occurred.)
That said, people should first report bugs to Fedora (or whoever is recompiling and redistributing it.) prior to going upstream as problems can and do occur when compiling with different options.
Even so, a blanket policy would be better.Yeah. As much as I'm on OBS's side in this discussion, I can see why this type of selective ruling would be off-putting for other redistributors.
I still think it's an understandable decision from OBS, although jumping to litigation is perhaps a bit uncalled for (I suppose it depends on how exactly the preceding discussion went). Hopefully, Fedora takes steps forward to prevent this type of thing happening again.
Last edited by MothWaves on 14 Feb 2025 at 6:50 pm UTC
Quoting died because of the incomprehensibly stupid UK Online Safety Act, along with the forum, user uploaded avatars and other things.
@ToddL
Liam has already posted why the button isn't there anymore, along with the forum being removed, and it has to do with the UK's new Online Safety Act.
Thank you!
I was left puzzled about these things as well and didn't even realize all 3 happened simultaneously.
Can anyone share where Liam posted that? I didn't notice it onsite and I kind of don't use BlueSky or Mastodon (partly because the things I most care about get posted on this site anyway).
Patreon
PayPal
How to set, change and reset your SteamOS / Steam Deck desktop sudo password
How to set up Decky Loader on Steam Deck / SteamOS for easy plugins
See more from me