Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

dizt3mp3r
Posts: 1447
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:54 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by dizt3mp3r » Wed Jan 23, 2019 2:24 am

"Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you." Joseph Heller Catch-22

justincase
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by justincase » Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:26 am

And just because someone made a joke in poor taste doesn't mean there's a conspiracy, or that they have an agenda they're trying to push.
I reserve the right to ignore any portion of any post if I deem it not constructive or likely to cause the discussion to degenerate.

PurpleGurl
Posts: 1777
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:11 am
Location: USA

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by PurpleGurl » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:20 am

Nobody was really saying there had to be a conspiracy or agenda, just that it was in the realm of possibilities. It was easy to assume both the blogger and this fellow were the same, even if that's somewhat of a leap. I also included pranking in the possibilities. But since maybe these two recently discovered things are unrelated incidents, you can still see how one could fuel the other, though it could just be unfortunate timing. The prank was done after the initial blog comment, but on or around the last day of comments before Emuandco left any posts there. It is a big coincidence to have a prank making it look like we had dirty code right after point blank accusations were made of the same sort.

There's a difference between paranoia and due diligence. I was only brainstorming and doing spitballing similar to what detectives do. That is similar to scientific method when done properly and ethically. First you form hypotheses in terms of who, how, and why (and everyone's role when there are multiple actors), which gives clues on how to investigate, and then you let the evidence speak for itself and go from there.

justincase
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by justincase » Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:11 pm

Sorry, I went on a but of a rant here.

TL;DR: Perhaps you should try actually listening when people post rational, logical arguments, backed by facts, instead of sensationalizing things with half baked theories that don't match up with the facts... over, and over again.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:20 am
Nobody was really saying there had to be a conspiracy or agenda, just that it was in the realm of possibilities.
No? I guess not, but when so many of your posts focus on these things, despite the actual probability of them being so low, it starts to sound like you want there to be a conspiracy fueled by some whackjob's agenda.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:20 am
It was easy to assume both the blogger and this fellow were the same, even if that's somewhat of a leap.
I'm honestly not sure who you mean when you say 'the blogger', as I never saw a defamatory blog around that time period. If you're referring to the guy at the kernelmode forums, it never really looked like it could be him, as he specifically stated that he had no intention of expending the effort to fix any of our code, and the (signed) commit was by PeyTy, who's GitHub profile states very clearly that he's working on GreenTeaOS, which is (in part) an attempt to fix (some of) our code.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:20 am
There's a difference between paranoia and due diligence.
And your posts looked more like the former than the latter.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:20 am
I was only brainstorming and doing spitballing similar to what detectives do. That is similar to scientific method when done properly and ethically. First you form hypotheses in terms of who, how, and why (and everyone's role when there are multiple actors), which gives clues on how to investigate, and then you let the evidence speak for itself and go from there.
And detectives also generally stop bothering with a theory when they are repeatedly given evidence against it.
I reserve the right to ignore any portion of any post if I deem it not constructive or likely to cause the discussion to degenerate.

PurpleGurl
Posts: 1777
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:11 am
Location: USA

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by PurpleGurl » Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 pm

Justincase:

That's exactly what I was doing -- listening to reason. I was not sensationalizing nothing nor do my posts focus on conspiracies or agendas. Being uncivil to me and it won't help your case to imply things about me who are not true or otherwise be uncivil. You speak about Occam's razor, but are you willing to extend that to everyone here, or just those you agree with?

I don't want there to be an agenda as you allege. I believe it is important to thoroughly discuss all possibilities and be aware of them. That is just being sensible and practicing due diligence.

So you don't know which kernelmode blogger I mentioned? You know, the Russian who blogged about us having stolen code, but gave us a tool he threw together? He first blogged about it in early December. I was careful to not give URLs though I can give it to you in private if you prefer. Daniel went over there the other day and tried talking sense to him, but he nearly didn't approve our moderator's post over there, but reluctantly allowed it (either for damage control). One of the threads about the site was deleted, and another in Off-Topic was recently locked. And working with GreenTea OS could easily be construed as a motive to trash us (nasty rivalry is more common than desired in open source projects), especially in light of things seen in the past in the forums when the that project was discussed. We see now that is not the case. But do you see now how accusations in the December on a blog AND this prank could superficially be seen as related? So we know they are not, now.

Yes, and detectives continue when they have more evidence. I had evidence you didn't see and I was careful to not share as I care about the team here and it is important when there is defamation to not further the defamation. Ever hear of the Streisand Effect? The more effort you spend on silencing defamation, the more it might spread since many hold to the adage, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." So I saw more things than you that could be connected. However, you should note that I included the other theories out there when their evidence came to light. And I was careful to mention in all my posts that we don't have enough evidence.

We should all try to stay on topic and stay mindful of Rule #1. Personally, I'd rather this conversation drop between you and I, but I don't run the forum. I tend to be the type to not inform on others, unless things are severe. However, this is in plain view of mods, and you've proven yourself to be a constructive member of this forum, which I mean with all sincerity, so I don't want Daniel to come down on you.


PeyTy
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by PeyTy » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:07 pm

It always scared me how in ReactOS someones silly, and not even correct, trolling literally equaled me to #1 terrorist.
You should never ever again relate me to any of those situations.
Greentea was never developed to "steal codes" or make war or whatever. The controversy repo was removed. And touching MS codes is strictly disallowed.
Period.

justincase
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by justincase » Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:02 pm

PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 pm
That's exactly what I was doing -- listening to reason. I was not sensationalizing nothing nor do my posts focus on conspiracies or agendas. Being uncivil to me and it won't help your case to imply things about me who are not true or otherwise be uncivil.
No, you were repeatedly posting claims that it could be those things after strong evidence had been shown against them. I realize that you didn't state it was the case as if it was a known fact, and I also realize that you weren't the only one posting such nonsense, but you did keep bringing it back up, saying that it could be, and ignoring the strong evidence against that had been shown earlier on the thread. Also, nothing I've said is really "uncivil", I've mainly been stating facts, producing evidence, and pointing out legitimate flaws in your (and other's) posts.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 pm
You speak about Occam's razor, but are you willing to extend that to everyone here, or just those you agree with?
Of course, in this case as well as the last, I think the simplest answer is probably right. That answer is that you didn't bother to understand the evidence I presented, and didn't realize how much your repeatedly posting wild, fairly obviously incorrect speculation could potentially harm not only your own credibility, but that of the ReactOS project itself. Hence why I'm taking the time to try to explain to you that just because there's a small chance that there's a conspiracy, or that someone is trying to push an agenda doesn't mean you should flood a thread with such theories. You end up drowning out the actual, factual information that others have presented in a bunch of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), which doesn't help us in any way.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 pm
So you don't know which kernelmode blogger I mentioned? You know, the Russian who blogged about us having stolen code, but gave us a tool he threw together? He first blogged about it in early December. I was careful to not give URLs though I can give it to you in private if you prefer. Daniel went over there the other day and tried talking sense to him, but he nearly didn't approve our moderator's post over there, but reluctantly allowed it (either for damage control). One of the threads about the site was deleted, and another in Off-Topic was recently locked.
With the information above, I'm able to recognize more certainly who you were referring to, and it is indeed who I speculated it may be in my previous post, however the confusion came from you calling him a blogger, when the only information I ever saw from him was a forum thread, not a blog. I have no idea if he also blogs, but I also don't care enough about him and his trash-talking to bother checking.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 pm
Yes, and detectives continue when they have more evidence. I had evidence you didn't see and I was careful to not share as I care about the team here and it is important when there is defamation to not further the defamation. Ever hear of the Streisand Effect? The more effort you spend on silencing defamation, the more it might spread since many hold to the adage, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." So I saw more things than you that could be connected. However, you should note that I included the other theories out there when their evidence came to light. And I was careful to mention in all my posts that we don't have enough evidence.
If you had actual evidence of your theories, then you should have posted them so that we (as a group) could see the whole picture and work together to prove if your theories were correct or incorrect. Perhaps if you'd posted more information about your evidence, and less speculation we could have more solidly proven that those theories were incorrect and stopped the continual FUD that you (and others) kept posting, and then we could have more easily shifted our focus to other avenues, like I did when I saw PeyTy in the chat and personally asked what the deal was with his commit.
PurpleGurl wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:43 pm
We should all try to stay on topic and stay mindful of Rule #1. Personally, I'd rather this conversation drop between you and I, but I don't run the forum. I tend to be the type to not inform on others, unless things are severe. However, this is in plain view of mods, and you've proven yourself to be a constructive member of this forum, which I mean with all sincerity, so I don't want Daniel to come down on you.
For those who don't know... Rule #1: Be polite, be courteous, be civil.
I am being polite, courteous, and civil.
I'm also done with this conversation. My reason for continuing posting here after the post where I presented irrefutable proof of what had actually happened, was to present a case to those of you who were repeatedly posting about conspiracies and agendas that have since been proven quite solidly to be nothing more than FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), that we shouldn't feed the FUD, and our strongest defence against it is to not spread it.
As such, and this goes for everyone, when such situations (undoubtedly) occur in the future, please try to refrain from posting about wild theories without also posting the supporting evidence, otherwise you're just feeding the FUD.
PeyTy wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:07 pm
It always scared me how in ReactOS someones silly, and not even correct, trolling literally equaled me to #1 terrorist.
You should never ever again relate me to any of those situations.
Greentea was never developed to "steal codes" or make war or whatever. The controversy repo was removed. And touching MS codes is strictly disallowed.
Period.
@PeyTy: Is there somewhere that you've posted your stance against using information gleaned from studying leaked Windows sources and/or the Windows Research Kernel? If so, you can simply post a link to it whenever people say such things.
I'm pretty sure I remember there being a decently prominent place where the ReactOS project had something like this posted, but I can't seem to find it any more. :?
I reserve the right to ignore any portion of any post if I deem it not constructive or likely to cause the discussion to degenerate.

PeyTy
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by PeyTy » Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:09 am

@justincase By asking this you are placing me in a situation where if I don't provide "proofs" than it will be interpreted as a lie. But even if I try, I will be called a troll. This happened many times, because in ReactOS your words means nothing. It is more about reputation you have, even if its based actually on a pranks, trolling and jokes from other people (yes, like exactly in this thread, someone makes a simple joke or humorous hyperbole, and this spreads as true source of information). It is just happened I made a fork of "omg! ReactOS is so large and impossible project! you cannot do this! you re just a troll! and you re stealing code, because it is impossible to code a fork of ReactOS in any other manner!". This is okay, I don't blaming anyone, this is expected and how society works. Yesterday TheFabba called my opinions "bullshit" in mattermost, and other known guy in Telegram group named me a "troll" like it is just a normal state of things and everyone follows them.

The thing I care is a reputation in a eyes of core devs, because community listens to them. Greentea looked aggressive to the outsiders because it followed different points of view. For example, I wasn't happy of CREDITS file because it had very little names in it and looked unrespectful to all other community (take a look how many names actually listed in every release notes of other projects), CREDITS was redirected to GitHub list of contributors. Also, I had to remove (actually very annoying) ReactOS references because it is happens that when you don't change names people call your fork "lol not even a Greentea, look ReactOS everywhere!" (with screenshots of German/etc installation screens (which I could not properly translate) and any place ReactOS was visible from user side). ReactOS also had many more BSODs at that point in time and could potentially share "based on that BSOD OS" negative reputation (I added then some patches to improve stability and TO THIS DAY people still come to me and say wow Greentea is so stable compared to ReactOS). Of course, without context, all of these was blamed as credits and copyrights removal. People still believe this.

I removed that repo as a result. No more reasons to blame.

Maybe Greentea looks impossible to implement, but I follow the Open Source idea, that I free to do weirdest of things. Many people believe that ReactOS will be never done too. We are in the same bucket.

Cheers.

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4323
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by EmuandCo » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:10 am

Ppl dont like it when you remove their names from the copyright headers of their intellectual property. If you do that anyways, you will find some nice aggression fallin upon ya. I fully understand that behavior. And you know how humans think. Bad things always are more interesting than good things. Just check the news on whatever source you use... bad stuff ONLY. Noone has any problem with your fork, unless you hide the true sources of your code. This is as bad as if your write a thesis @ university and don't reference your sources. Ppl will DESTROY you for claiming other's work as yours.
Image
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.

florian
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by florian » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:47 pm

justincase wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:02 pm
@PeyTy: Is there somewhere that you've posted your stance against using information gleaned from studying leaked Windows sources and/or the Windows Research Kernel? If so, you can simply post a link to it whenever people say such things.

"No proprietary code allowed or in use. If you found any code which violates GPL, then please open issue! IT WILL BE REMOVED TO ENSURE GPL CONFORMANCE. If yours country law disallows use of some parts of the project or has another problem, then DO NOT USE OR DISTRIBUTE binary builds or source code. Open issue instead!" (Source: https://github.com/GreenteaOS/Greentea)

But why PeyTy is avoiding to name ReactOS, ...

"We are using some parts from other open source projects as well. [...] This project is done by a broad variety of people." (https://github.com/GreenteaOS/Greentea)


@PeyTy: Please consider to add at least once for instance "GreenTea is a fork of ReactOS." Then your reputation would rise - cause some parts, really?...

Otherwise it's a like adorning oneself with borrowed plumes. As a comparison: The relation of WINE to ReactOS is clearly named here and here (in our forum) probably too.

By the way, we are grateful that you confirmed that it is not related to any SJW/whatever or ReactOS hate. Thank you!

justincase
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by justincase » Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:45 pm

justincase wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:02 pm
@PeyTy: Is there somewhere that you've posted your stance against using information gleaned from studying leaked Windows sources and/or the Windows Research Kernel? If so, you can simply post a link to it whenever people say such things.
PeyTy wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:09 am
@justincase By asking this you are placing me in a situation where if I don't provide "proofs" than it will be interpreted as a lie. But even if I try, I will be called a troll.
@PeyTy: Sorry to disappoint, but I'm not trolling you. I legitimately think that you should have a place where you state your stance regarding non-use of potentially problematic code, and that your standard response to people saying that you've used such code is to simply state that you don't use it, and you don't accept it from your contributors, and give them a link to where you've posted that stance in an official place.
florian wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:47 pm
"No proprietary code allowed or in use. If you found any code which violates GPL, then please open issue! IT WILL BE REMOVED TO ENSURE GPL CONFORMANCE. If yours country law disallows use of some parts of the project or has another problem, then DO NOT USE OR DISTRIBUTE binary builds or source code. Open issue instead!" (Source: https://github.com/GreenteaOS/Greentea)
@florian: Thank you, this is exactly what I meant. I just didn't know where it was.
@PeyTy: This should be the link that you point people to when they make such claims as that you've used leaked Windows sources to make Greentea OS: https://github.com/GreenteaOS/Greentea#license
I reserve the right to ignore any portion of any post if I deem it not constructive or likely to cause the discussion to degenerate.

PeyTy
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by PeyTy » Fri Jan 25, 2019 10:30 pm

> But why PeyTy is avoiding to name ReactOS, ...

I already answered that

> "GreenTea is a fork of ReactOS." .. some parts, really?...

No, it is not. Currently, we develop new kernel. ReactOS was always seen as a dependency of parts Wine doesn't provide. Only at the very-very beginning Greentea was clearly a fork (or "the fork", lol) aimed at only applying stability patches from Jira/etc and rejecting breaking changes. Direction of the project was changed, for many reasons.

> The relation of WINE to ReactOS

ReactOS uses more than just Wine. You're trying to pretend that only that-one-thing matter. Greentea has wider view of what is important.

> you confirmed that it is not related to any SJW/whatever

CoC was adopted before all that SJW mess... We have strict 0+ content rating (for kids and their parents) and it was obvious we need proper CoC for newcoming people.

> I just didn't know where it was.

Gladly in 2019 it really feels that people still read READMEs and writing them is not useless :D

florian
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Reactos participation and windows source leaked

Post by florian » Tue Jan 29, 2019 1:46 am

@PeyTy: Sorry, I am not a native speaker of english. Second attempt:

Wine is just one example of many borrowed projects. But probably it's one of ReactOS more important ones - and I thougt that ReactOS would be your "pillar number one" which then should be named as we're stating here that "ReactOS depends on Wine mainly for user mode DLLs".

Are you replacing borrowed components of Wine, too? If not, your homepage could learn a lesson form our homepage!

By the way, remembering the time of ReactOS' kernel development in addition to its numbers of developers... Well, without the groundwork of ReactOS (which is still alpha) and without any offence, you're sure your project of a new kernel is not a "dead end"? Anyway, good luck to your project and your efforts.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests