Conversation

If they're both open source and the differences aren't massive, technically speaking, it's entirely possible that both have a future. In that kind of a case the vast majority of development effort can actually be shared between the projects and usually is.
1
This isn't an accurate portrayal of what happened. I didn't leave Copperhead but rather there was a takeover of the company and I was pushed out of it. The project continued onwards as GrapheneOS and still in the early stages of being revived after so much damage has been done.
1
There's an ongoing war on the project by the same people involved in that crisis. That includes them spreading misinformation, intimidating contributors/supporters and many other ways of causing as much damage as they can. It has led to the current situation of the project.
2
From my pov, all that could be true, but still issues with how both sides conducted themselves afterwards. I want a team I can count on, and seeing Copperhead assets promoting a GrapheneOS makes the situation look extremely messy, where a clean break would've been better IMO
2
You're repeating their malicious false claims about what happened in this tweet. You're unintentionally helping them to continue causing harm. twitter.com/thomaskerin/st I hope you can see how that would cause harm to the project, and why I'm responding the way that I am to it.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @jkaartinen @tadpoet and 2 others
Copperhead doesn't have its signing keys anymore. The main dev left one day and the project blew up because of it. I haven't had updates on that phone in a year or two. The dev then setup Graphene OS. I guess it's clearer why I asked now ;)
1
You suggest that a clean break, but this is the original project started before Copperhead existed as a company and continued on after they tried to take over control/ownership through ultimatums/threats, against all the agreed upon terms for the company's involvement.
1
Show replies