We could work with Framework and [..]
* Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> [260425 11:52]:
We could work with Framework and [..]
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/14/framework_linux_controversy/
On 2026-04-27 10:02, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
* Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> [260425 11:52]:
We could work with Framework and [..]
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/14/framework_linux_controversy/
Yes, but... Debian collaborates with far worse companies than Framework.
I can find a couple here [1] who will say "neutrality" any day toOh, the link
better their bottom line.
* Martin <debacle@debian.org> [260427 10:22]:I can find a couple here [1] who will say "neutrality" any day to
On 2026-04-27 10:02, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
* Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> [260425 11:52]:
We could work with Framework and [..]
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/14/framework_linux_controversy/
Yes, but... Debian collaborates with far worse companies than Framework.
If you make this argument, could you also name them? This so we can stop collaborating with such people?
If you make this argument, could you also name them? This so we can stop collaborating with such people?
On 2026-04-27 10:02, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:But this "collaboration" is about "we use their resources", either for computing power or for debconf sponsorships and the like. As far as I understood previous discussions, the problem is that there are not many alternatives other than "there will be no debconf" or "then we do not have CI anymore". The thing the companies get back is some advertisement and I do not think that's the same as us showing that we like or support them. I see it as a necessary evil.
* Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> [260425 11:52]:
We could work with Framework and [..]
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/14/framework_linux_controversy/
Yes, but... Debian collaborates with far worse companies than Framework.
Not meant as an excuse. Just pointing out, that we as a project lack common ethical standards to decide which companies we work with.
* Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> [260425 11:52]:
We could work with Framework and [..]
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/14/framework_linux_controversy/
These people, really?
C.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 10:43:47AM +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
If you make this argument, could you also name them? This so we can stop
collaborating with such people?
He talks about MAGA, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, (Apple). We get
sponsorship money from them, for conferences and for infrastructure.
However I always fail to see the collaborating part, as this means we
share something, which is not the case at all.
The original proposal is very different though. We don't loose
anything by not
collaborating with Framework. Doing so, in my mind, would imply a
far stronger
endorsement than when we accept Google as a DebConf sponsor.
Framework caught my attention recently as I discovered that they have a
12'' inch version of their laptop line up and I was curious about the
Linux compatibility on their laptops and I came to know that they
officially support Fedora, Ubuntu and Bazzite but they also listed Mint, >Arch and NixOS as community supported ones [1].
Quoting Martin (2026-04-27 10:21:59)I'm replying to josch's mail, but not specifically to josch's argument
On 2026-04-27 10:02, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
* Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> [260425 11:52]:
We could work with Framework and [..]
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/14/framework_linux_controversy/
Yes, but... Debian collaborates with far worse companies than
Framework. Not meant as an excuse. Just pointing out, that we as a
project lack common ethical standards to decide which companies we
work with.
But this "collaboration" is about "we use their resources", either for computing power or for debconf sponsorships and the like. As far as I understood previous discussions, the problem is that there are not
many alternatives other than "there will be no debconf" or "then we do
not have CI anymore". The thing the companies get back is some
advertisement and I do not think that's the same as us showing that we
like or support them. I see it as a necessary evil.
The original proposal is very different though. We don't loose
anything by not collaborating with Framework. Doing so, in my mind,
would imply a far stronger endorsement than when we accept Google as a DebConf sponsor. What we do give to Google is some advertisement space
on banners and t-shirts. Similarly the page
https://www.debian.org/partners/ lists entities which have given
something back to *us* and in return they get their logo on the page.
By going out of our way and doing something like adding a "Debian Certification" we are giving something to them which I feel *very* uncomfortable giving away to a company like Framework.
Yes, Sruthi's DPL platform lists laptops pre-installed with Debian as
a goal but it also lists diversity as one of her core principles and Framework made it very clear that their tent is big enough for even
those people who would rather see this world be less diverse.
I think I understand that we do put up with some companies because we
decided that we want compute resources and we want debconf to happen,
okay. But we do not *need* to certify hardware and if we do go out of
our way to do it, then maybe lets look very closely to whom we are
providing this service and maybe lets at least start with manufactures
which are more aligned with Debian's principles than Framework is.
I would love to hear Sruthi's position on this.
On Sat, 25 Apr 2026 11:46, Aryan Karamtoth <spaciouscoder78@disroot.org> wrote:
Hello fellow developers and maintainers as well as the DPL,
Framework caught my attention recently as I discovered that they have a 12'' inch version of their laptop line up and I was curious about the
Linux compatibility on their laptops and I came to know that they officially support Fedora, Ubuntu and Bazzite but they also listed Mint, Arch and NixOS as community supported ones [1].
I agree with Chris here. Endorsing a dev whose values are known to be deeply racist is very questionable.
This could've been an honest mistake; however the least they could've done
is apologize and rescind the endorsement.
Anyway, I am not here to discuss Frameworks misgivings.
Regardless, I find this an important topic; if hardware has Debian preinstalled, this a) helps us and b) eventually gets more people to use Linux.
I would like to suggest a different company: Star Labs [0]. They are a small UK-based company also catering to linux-first devices. While it's not
modular as the Framework it is still really good in terms of repairability and privacy (hardware kill switches). Furthermore, their support has been excellent. Disclaimer: I am owning a StarBook MK VI which is my main computing device since 2 years now.
A few datapoints: - Battery life is fairly decent (~5 h medium usage under sway)
- Everything just works ootb (hardware-wise)
- The intel models are available with coreboot
- Every single part can be purchased as spare/replacement
- The bottom and lid is made out of aluminum and it's fairly scratch-resistant
The only complaint that I have that the screen could be brighter, and that the rubber feet tend to get loose.
(I really should write a blogpost at some point about it)
best,
werdahias
Links:
[0]: https://de.starlabs.systems/
Heya,
reply to the whole conversation as I have followed it, I am a bit too
sick as
of now to stitch together the quotes and all my ideas.
I believe regarding their support of omarchy and Hyprland, given the
later
mostly organises on proprietary platforms, and from what I know generally a >lot of framework's community is also on said platform? (discord) so it is >hard to keep track of hey is the community still toxic, have they cleansed >their act? I mean framework is now giving more money to Hyprland, I would >sure hope so?
I would love if Debian came as an install option from more providers,
like one of the companies mentioned earlier in the list, and hopefully if
we work with them with our philosophies and our view points they might >reconsider their frameworks? (I am stealing this from you peb)
Unfortunately the main devs of both hyprland and omarchy are holding views/values very detrimental to Debian, and the surrounding community does not care to be supporting / tolerating those.it seems very odd to me that we're casting aspersions on an
Matthias Geiger left as an exercise for the reader:If we had to make a public statement about why Debian is okay with shipping hyprland I doubt that such a statement would include that we are welcoming those people who want to see some of our members gone or would be fine with harassment and trolling. When Framework was asked about a clarification about *why* they are okay with funding hyprland they could've said that they stand for diversity and respectful interaction and that they do explicitly *not* endorse what some important figures in the hyprland community are known for. But that's not what they did. Instead, they doubled down and explained that they follow the "big tent" approach, meaning that they even invite those people who want to see others out. [1]
Unfortunately the main devs of both hyprland and omarchy are holding views/values very detrimental to Debian, and the surrounding community does not care to be supporting / tolerating those.
it seems very odd to me that we're casting aspersions on an
organization for supporting a project which *we package and
ship* (and many people, myself included, use). i hardly find
that a coherent position. if this is to be some litmus, let's
start with removing the software from the debian archives (which, again, please don't; it's my compositor of choice).
Framework made it very clear that their tent is big enough for even those people who would rather see this world be less diverse.Now this thread has the link to the relevant forum post of theirs.
From my personal point of view, I like to look at the bigger things from a neutral point of perspective wherever possible by removing all of the drama surrounding something.some people want some other people not to exist at all (IOW, dead), it's a
Matthias Geiger left as an exercise for the reader:does
Unfortunately the main devs of both hyprland and omarchy are holding views/values very detrimental to Debian, and the surrounding community
I agree with the above statement.not care to be supporting / tolerating those.
it seems very odd to me that we're casting aspersions on an
organization for supporting a project which *we package and
ship* (and many people, myself included, use). i hardly find
that a coherent position. if this is to be some litmus, let's
start with removing the software from the debian archives
(which, again, please don't; it's my compositor of choice).
Matthias Geiger left as an exercise for the reader:
Unfortunately the main devs of both hyprland and omarchy are holding
views/values very detrimental to Debian, and the surrounding community does >> not care to be supporting / tolerating those.
it seems very odd to me that we're casting aspersions on an
organization for supporting a project which *we package and
On 2026-04-28, nick black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> wrote:y does
Matthias Geiger left as an exercise for the reader:
Unfortunately the main devs of both hyprland and omarchy are holding views/values very detrimental to Debian, and the surrounding communit
not care to be supporting / tolerating those.
it seems very odd to me that we're casting aspersions on an
organization for supporting a project which *we package and
We don't package omarchy, which has far worse than the other projects.
As another example, Debian packages bs1770gain and works together with
its maintainer. I invite you to look at the project's official homepage
as linked by Debian. You can also look at other pages on the same
domain.
The Debian maintainer insists on keeping the references to the project.
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 493846:30:20 |
| Calls: | 146 |
| Files: | 547 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (97K bytes) |
| Messages: | 76,794 |