arewexlibreyet.md

Are we XLibre yet?

X11 has been, and still is, a vital piece of technology at the core of professional Unix-like workstations since decades. It has a proven track record of supporting enterprise-grade applications with long-term protocol stability and platform compatibility. It has matured over decades. XLibre is an actively developed fork of the X.Org X11 server, initiated by the most active X.Org developer and supported by the open source community.

An incompatible alternative, Wayland, is being aggressively pushed by IBM = Red Hat = Gnome = Fedora = freedesktop.org. However, it is not ready to succeed X11 as it its governance model leads to never-ending discussions and prevents even the most essential functionality from existing. Think twice before abandoning Xorg. Wayland breaks everything!

It is time that the open source community reclaims what was ours to begin with. This page lists distributions supporting XLibre so that you can make an informed choice.

--> Table has moved to https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/wiki/Are-We-XLibre-Yet%3F <--

Alpine should be marked as hostile for xlibre, as one the dev in alpine will apparently issue a "coc violation" of anyone who want to port xlibre to alpine for "political reason"

Alpine is a niche distribution anyway with a small user base. He can issue CoC violations all he wants. The maintainer of Alpine should go and read the ToS of the host site he uses and see the section about abuse of ToS by means of CoC misuse and using discrimination.

6.1. You represent and warrant that: (i) your use of the Website will be in strict accordance with this Agreement and with all applicable laws and regulations (including without limitation any local laws or regulations in your country, state, city, or other governmental area, regarding online conduct and acceptable content, and including all applicable laws regarding the transmission of technical data exported from the United States or the country in which you reside); and (ii) your use of the Website will not infringe or misappropriate the intellectual property rights of any third party.

10.4. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of California, U.S.A., and the parties submit to the jurisdiction of the State and Federal courts in San Francisco, California, without giving effect to any conflicts of laws principles.

California has anti-discrimination laws. GitLab is based in CA and Alpine Linux using a falsified CoC to exclude people for political reasons can be seen as breaking the anti-discrimination laws.

Alpine should be marked as hostile for xlibre, as one the dev in alpine will apparently issue a "coc violation" of anyone who want to port xlibre to alpine for "political reason"

Alpine is a niche distribution anyway with a small user base. He can issue CoC violations all he wants. The maintainer of Alpine should go and read the ToS of the host site he uses and see the section about abuse of ToS by means of CoC misuse and using discrimination.

6.1. You represent and warrant that: (i) your use of the Website will be in strict accordance with this Agreement and with all applicable laws and regulations (including without limitation any local laws or regulations in your country, state, city, or other governmental area, regarding online conduct and acceptable content, and including all applicable laws regarding the transmission of technical data exported from the United States or the country in which you reside); and (ii) your use of the Website will not infringe or misappropriate the intellectual property rights of any third party.

10.4. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of California, U.S.A., and the parties submit to the jurisdiction of the State and Federal courts in San Francisco, California, without giving effect to any conflicts of laws principles.

California has anti-discrimination laws. GitLab is based in CA and Alpine Linux using a falsified CoC to exclude people for political reasons can be seen as breaking the anti-discrimination laws.

Considering they wouldn't think twice about it. how about reporting the violation if it happens?

Alpine should be marked as hostile for xlibre, as one the dev in alpine will apparently issue a "coc violation" of anyone who want to port xlibre to alpine for "political reason"

Alpine is a niche distribution anyway with a small user base. He can issue CoC violations all he wants. The maintainer of Alpine should go and read the ToS of the host site he uses and see the section about abuse of ToS by means of CoC misuse and using discrimination.
6.1. You represent and warrant that: (i) your use of the Website will be in strict accordance with this Agreement and with all applicable laws and regulations (including without limitation any local laws or regulations in your country, state, city, or other governmental area, regarding online conduct and acceptable content, and including all applicable laws regarding the transmission of technical data exported from the United States or the country in which you reside); and (ii) your use of the Website will not infringe or misappropriate the intellectual property rights of any third party.
10.4. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of California, U.S.A., and the parties submit to the jurisdiction of the State and Federal courts in San Francisco, California, without giving effect to any conflicts of laws principles.
California has anti-discrimination laws. GitLab is based in CA and Alpine Linux using a falsified CoC to exclude people for political reasons can be seen as breaking the anti-discrimination laws.

Considering they wouldn't think twice about it. how about reporting the violation if it happens?

ok , but still mark it as hostile for letting people know to avoid this distribution if they want to use xlibre ?

I agree. They are openly hostile and should be marked as such. Trying to beat them at their own game just means lawyers get involved. It’s both cheaper and more time efficient to just not deal with hypotheticals at this point.

…

________________________________ From: Xgui4 Studio ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2025 3:48:30 PM To: xgui4 ***@***.***> Cc: Comment ***@***.***> Subject: Re: probonopd/arewexlibreyet.md @xgui4 commented on this gist.

________________________________ Alpine should be marked as hostile for xlibre, as one the dev in alpine will apparently issue a "coc violation" of anyone who want to port xlibre to alpine for "political reason" Alpine is a niche distribution anyway with a small user base. He can issue CoC violations all he wants. The maintainer of Alpine should go and read the ToS of the host site he uses and see the section about abuse of ToS by means of CoC misuse and using discrimination. 6.1. You represent and warrant that: (i) your use of the Website will be in strict accordance with this Agreement and with all applicable laws and regulations (including without limitation any local laws or regulations in your country, state, city, or other governmental area, regarding online conduct and acceptable content, and including all applicable laws regarding the transmission of technical data exported from the United States or the country in which you reside); and (ii) your use of the Website will not infringe or misappropriate the intellectual property rights of any third party. 10.4. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of California, U.S.A., and the parties submit to the jurisdiction of the State and Federal courts in San Francisco, California, without giving effect to any conflicts of laws principles. California has anti-discrimination laws. GitLab is based in CA and Alpine Linux using a falsified CoC to exclude people for political reasons can be seen as breaking the anti-discrimination laws. Considering they wouldn't think twice about it. how about reporting the violation if it happens? ok , but still mark it as hostile for letting people know to avoid this distribution if they want to use xlibre ? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://gist.github.com/probonopd/301319568a554abe7426c02eb5e19b5a#gistcomment-5660466> or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AZDUTMYUVCRB7HAUTJ2OY6T3GWXL7BFKMF2HI4TJMJ2XIZLTSKBKK5TBNR2WLJDUOJ2WLJDOMFWWLO3UNBZGKYLEL5YGC4TUNFRWS4DBNZ2F6YLDORUXM2LUPGBKK5TBNR2WLJDHNFZXJJDOMFWWLK3UNBZGKYLEL52HS4DFVRZXKYTKMVRXIX3UPFYGLK2HNFZXIQ3PNVWWK3TUUZ2G64DJMNZZDAVEOR4XAZNEM5UXG5FFOZQWY5LFVEYTGOJQGIZTGOBSU52HE2LHM5SXFJTDOJSWC5DF>. You are receiving this email because you commented on the thread. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.

I agree. They are openly hostile and should be marked as such. Trying to beat them at their own game just means lawyers get involved. It’s both cheaper and more time efficient to just not deal with hypotheticals at this point.
…
________________________________ From: Xgui4 Studio @.> Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2025 3:48:30 PM To: xgui4 @.> Cc: Comment @.***> Subject: Re: probonopd/arewexlibreyet.md @xgui4 commented on this gist.
________________________________ Alpine should be marked as hostile for xlibre, as one the dev in alpine will apparently issue a "coc violation" of anyone who want to port xlibre to alpine for "political reason" Alpine is a niche distribution anyway with a small user base. He can issue CoC violations all he wants. The maintainer of Alpine should go and read the ToS of the host site he uses and see the section about abuse of ToS by means of CoC misuse and using discrimination. 6.1. You represent and warrant that: (i) your use of the Website will be in strict accordance with this Agreement and with all applicable laws and regulations (including without limitation any local laws or regulations in your country, state, city, or other governmental area, regarding online conduct and acceptable content, and including all applicable laws regarding the transmission of technical data exported from the United States or the country in which you reside); and (ii) your use of the Website will not infringe or misappropriate the intellectual property rights of any third party. 10.4. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of California, U.S.A., and the parties submit to the jurisdiction of the State and Federal courts in San Francisco, California, without giving effect to any conflicts of laws principles. California has anti-discrimination laws. GitLab is based in CA and Alpine Linux using a falsified CoC to exclude people for political reasons can be seen as breaking the anti-discrimination laws. Considering they wouldn't think twice about it. how about reporting the violation if it happens? ok , but still mark it as hostile for letting people know to avoid this distribution if they want to use xlibre ? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://gist.github.com/probonopd/301319568a554abe7426c02eb5e19b5a#gistcomment-5660466 or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AZDUTMYUVCRB7HAUTJ2OY6T3GWXL7BFKMF2HI4TJMJ2XIZLTSKBKK5TBNR2WLJDUOJ2WLJDOMFWWLO3UNBZGKYLEL5YGC4TUNFRWS4DBNZ2F6YLDORUXM2LUPGBKK5TBNR2WLJDHNFZXJJDOMFWWLK3UNBZGKYLEL52HS4DFVRZXKYTKMVRXIX3UPFYGLK2HNFZXIQ3PNVWWK3TUUZ2G64DJMNZZDAVEOR4XAZNEM5UXG5FFOZQWY5LFVEYTGOJQGIZTGOBSU52HE2LHM5SXFJTDOJSWC5DF. You are receiving this email because you commented on the thread. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOShttps://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Androidhttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

I agree. Let them play FAFO but equally, I would bring it up on their discussions and requests and if they try to CoC you, report them to GitLab. Easy.

No need for lawyers. Just report them for ToS violations.

ok , but still mark it as hostile for letting people know to avoid this distribution if they want to use xlibre ?

I've said it elsewhere: “Hostile” is your interpretation. How do you know? Have you spoken to them directly? Please, this is not a war. Let's focus on our work and do it well. People are smart enogh to figure out whether they want to use Alpine Linux or not. And if there is no XLibre package they will start to asks questions themselves.

ok , but still mark it as hostile for letting people know to avoid this distribution if they want to use xlibre ?

I've said it elsewhere: “Hostile” is your interpretation. How do you know? Have you spoken to them directly? Please, this is not a war. Let's focus on our work and do it well. People are smart enogh to figure out whether they want to use Alpine Linux or not. And if there is no XLibre package they will start to asks questions themselves.

but "not supportive" is kinda vague and not useful compared to something like a "no xlibre stand" they is a pretty big difference. like for the distro where they is no official support, they might have a unofficial support but not for alpine where they want no xlibre at all

or maybe for these distro , instead of marking not supporting, you could mark as "banned" this word is not political at all

and while i do not like these extremist , we cannot just ignore them or they will win.

Actually, let Alpine be. They're going to hang themselves and we literally handed them the noose. How you ask? By simply existing.

You know the developer is going to get overtly hostile when asked so eventually, a user is going to pop the question and get lambasted and slammed like John Cena getting an F5 from Brock Lesnar. Wham bam thank you ma'am.

And the user will get offended and go report the project for ToS violations to GitLab, and GitLab will review the conversation, yes they'll have logs and can bring back any deleted comments, and they'll see who's actually at fault, and they'll pull the trigger and Alpine Linux will get a harsh humbling.

Actually, let Alpine be. They're going to hang themselves and we literally handed them the noose. How you ask? By simply existing.

You know the developer is going to get overtly hostile when asked so eventually, a user is going to pop the question and get lambasted and slammed like John Cena getting an F5 from Brock Lesnar. Wham bam thank you ma'am.

And the user will get offended and go report the project for ToS violations to GitLab, and GitLab will review the conversation, yes they'll have logs and can bring back any deleted comments, and they'll see who's actually at fault, and they'll pull the trigger and Alpine Linux will get a harsh humbling.

i dont trust gitlab or github to do anything regarding that ...

and letting people getting offended and banned does sound good ... that sound evil... by doing nothing you are doing them a favour... and you do not want to alpine to become great ? cause you sound like you are against them "pacifically" but would not work imo.

Maybe the field should be large enough to place a small quote/link when someone with authority to speak for the distro has said something publicly which makes their position clear.

I don't think assessment words like "hostile" should be used, unless an authority for the distro used it, and then it should be in quotes, with a link.

When you know a subject is controversial or disputed, best to use empirical facts to make your point.

Maybe the field should be large enough to place a small quote/link when someone with authority to speak for the distro has said something publicly which makes their position clear.

I don't think assessment words like "hostile" should be used, unless an authority for the distro used it, and then it should be in quotes, with a link.

When you know a subject is controversial or disputed, best to use empirical facts to make your point.

well but i dont think that "hostile" is controversial for the alpine situation ... unless you think exploiting coc is ok ... then it is ok to use word like "banned" or "officially rejected"

Actually, let Alpine be. They're going to hang themselves and we literally handed them the noose. How you ask? By simply existing.
You know the developer is going to get overtly hostile when asked so eventually, a user is going to pop the question and get lambasted and slammed like John Cena getting an F5 from Brock Lesnar. Wham bam thank you ma'am.
And the user will get offended and go report the project for ToS violations to GitLab, and GitLab will review the conversation, yes they'll have logs and can bring back any deleted comments, and they'll see who's actually at fault, and they'll pull the trigger and Alpine Linux will get a harsh humbling.

i dont trust gitlab or github to do anything regarding that ...

and letting people getting offended and banned does sound good ... that sound evil... by doing nothing you are doing them a favour... and you do not want to alpine to become great ? cause you sound like you are against them "pacifically" but would not work imo.

I'm about letting a distribution play FAFO the hard way to let them learn a hard valuable lesson. Letting them alienate their userbase will be far worse for them. Small distributions need people. All it will take is a bad article to pop up on a news page, and pretty much as I said Alpine hangs itself. It's not evil, it's letting them show how evil they are.

I'm about letting a distribution play FAFO the hard way to let them learn a hard valuable lesson. Letting them alienate their userbase will be far worse for them. Small distributions need people. All it will take is a bad article to pop up on a news page, and pretty much as I said Alpine hangs itself.

Please get off your high horse; power tripping is best done in a BDSM setting instead (there is some overlap with the open source community, but I digress). As a small distro, the Alpine people mostly are their user base, so any "negative" press is going to be laughed out of the room.

It's not evil, it's letting them show how evil they are.

You sound like a cartoon villain lol

Seen on the Slackware thread:

Man, I believe that's extremely strange. Do you have seen in this forum systemd guys demanding the Slackware to switch to it? Do you have seen GNOME guys demanding the Slackware to add it back? Do you have seen RedHat guys demanding the Slackware to switch to RPM packages, yum and Anaconda? NEVER.

BUT, one of the most active ideologists of XLibre using the handle ReaperX7, not so long ago has been on our forum, but not to present us the XLibre, but right on to request the switch to it on our Current's Requests thread. Strange, right?
HOWEVER, do you wonder what happens when (what they consider a "small") Linux distribution refuses, and even they arrive at conflict with the maintainer because their insistence?

As far as understand, in this case they take revenge and in the link below you can see no one else than the glorious ReaperX7 planing to take down the Alpine Linux git repositories and web infrastructure. For discrimination, of course!

Now I don't know who that reaper guy is, but what he's doing is wrong. We won't win anyone over by spamming the maintainers and then attempting to hack them if we won't get our way.

Unverified, un-validated, Ad hominem attacks are wrong also..

Seen on the Slackware thread:

Man, I believe that's extremely strange. Do you have seen in this forum systemd guys demanding the Slackware to switch to it? Do you have seen GNOME guys demanding the Slackware to add it back? Do you have seen RedHat guys demanding the Slackware to switch to RPM packages, yum and Anaconda? NEVER.
BUT, one of the most active ideologists of XLibre using the handle ReaperX7, not so long ago has been on our forum, but not to present us the XLibre, but right on to request the switch to it on our Current's Requests thread. Strange, right?
HOWEVER, do you wonder what happens when (what they consider a "small") Linux distribution refuses, and even they arrive at conflict with the maintainer because their insistence?
As far as understand, in this case they take revenge and in the link below you can see no one else than the glorious ReaperX7 planing to take down the Alpine Linux git repositories and web infrastructure. For discrimination, of course!

Now I don't know who that reaper guy is, but what he's doing is wrong. We won't win anyone over by spamming the maintainers and then attempting to hack them if we won't get our way.

Considering the ideology that is opposing this fork. Impersonating someone is a known tactic of theirs. As well as paying for ddos's which fsf and all the sites hosting the gnu libs are facing atm.

honestly for that amount of effort just fork alpine and put x11libre.. it would be far more interesting... than just idiotly wait bandwidth

Considering the ideology that is opposing this fork. Impersonating someone is a known tactic of theirs. As well as paying for ddos's which fsf and all the sites hosting the gnu libs are facing atm.

Turnabout is fair play.... but it's not the "high ground".

Considering the ideology that is opposing this fork. Impersonating someone is a known tactic of theirs. As well as paying for ddos's which fsf and all the sites hosting the gnu libs are facing atm.

Turnabout is fair play.... but it's not the "high ground".

You're up against an ideology that has taken quite a few groups and taken quite a few pages from Chinese communist dictator mao zadong.
There is no high ground here, only survival or letting them take over yet another part of society.

There is no high ground here, only survival or letting them take over yet another part of society.

"High ground" is clearly devalued in existential matters, but men of honor still have their limits: We must take care not to do what we are uninterested in living with having done. Admittedly, that ground is not very high. Still:

We are all accountable for what we do. "Just following orders" is not a defense. No matter whence the orders. Yet... history, and therefore what is "right", will be written by the survivors. It's good to survive.

You're up against an ideology that has taken quite a few groups and taken quite a few pages from Chinese communist dictator mao zadong.
There is no high ground here, only survival or letting them take over yet another part of society.

We are all accountable for what we do. "Just following orders" is not a defense. No matter whence the orders. Yet... history, and therefore what is "right", will be written by the survivors. It's good to survive.

Sometimes I wonder why people don't believe in God...

You're up against an ideology that has taken quite a few groups and taken quite a few pages from Chinese communist dictator mao zadong.
There is no high ground here, only survival or letting them take over yet another part of society.

We are all accountable for what we do. "Just following orders" is not a defense. No matter whence the orders. Yet... history, and therefore what is "right", will be written by the survivors. It's good to survive.

Sometimes I wonder why people don't believe in God...

i am atheist so ...

Seen on the Slackware thread:

Man, I believe that's extremely strange. Do you have seen in this forum systemd guys demanding the Slackware to switch to it? Do you have seen GNOME guys demanding the Slackware to add it back? Do you have seen RedHat guys demanding the Slackware to switch to RPM packages, yum and Anaconda? NEVER.
BUT, one of the most active ideologists of XLibre using the handle ReaperX7, not so long ago has been on our forum, but not to present us the XLibre, but right on to request the switch to it on our Current's Requests thread. Strange, right?
HOWEVER, do you wonder what happens when (what they consider a "small") Linux distribution refuses, and even they arrive at conflict with the maintainer because their insistence?
As far as understand, in this case they take revenge and in the link below you can see no one else than the glorious ReaperX7 planing to take down the Alpine Linux git repositories and web infrastructure. For discrimination, of course!

Now I don't know who that reaper guy is, but what he's doing is wrong. We won't win anyone over by spamming the maintainers and then attempting to hack them if we won't get our way.

Considering the ideology that is opposing this fork. Impersonating someone is a known tactic of theirs. As well as paying for ddos's which fsf and all the sites hosting the gnu libs are facing atm.

Wow, talk about spinning things out of context. How typical...

I never said to take them down directly. I said let Alpine hang itself by letting them continue to act belligerent towards anyone who would suggest adding Xlibre and eventually they'd get reported to GitLab because of GitLab's TOS. Geez... read the post, not skim the post... I'd also never DDOS, DOX, or any other bullshit like that. I don't even know how to go about doing any of that, plus that extremely illegal if I even could figure it out. If anyone is going to get in trouble, I let them get themselves in trouble while I do nothing but sit back and watch. I let the laws of inevitability and hubris deal with fools on their pace.

I did argue against systemd adoption when it was new on the scene. It wasn't tested. It was pushed on distributions haphazardly out of laziness to properly writing shell scripts for bash. That was ten years ago. Things have changed in ten years. I no longer use Slackware for obvious reasons. They're openly hostile to a lot of ideas, moreso than I.

Hell, these days I use ArchLinux which has systemd. Ten years has proven systemd as reasonably good software finally. Do I regret not being for it back then? No. As I said, it was too new and was a cop out for lazy maintainers at the time. 10 years later, it's a different story. You could argue the case for wayland, but wayland and it's discombobulated cluster of compositors and broken protocols after ten years has not made the same progress as systemd. Not by a long shot.

This badgering is why I left Slackware and why many of these kinds of people there can kiss by ass. All they do is muckrake like a bunch of holier-than-thous when honestly, their all nothing special. I asked about how to incorporate and use ZFS once as the rootfs, and instead of a reasonable answer like "Oh! Here's steps 1~X to incorporate ZFS", I got "you're an idiot", "you're against GPL", "you're against Linux", I think even a Greta Thunberg wannabe even did a "How dare you?!", etc. and it never stopped until I unsubscribed the thread and an admin supposedly locked it at my request.

Yes, I did share the news of Xlibre to Slackware's -Current branch updated package post list. And immediately, I got lambasted by the same people as always including him. The holier-than-thous. So honestly, if this is what they want to be like, then their loss. They were a good community until they showed their true colors.

Let me give you an insight on the person who wrote that hit piece, he's a nutjob of the worst kind. A fanatic. He attacked me in two separate threads for the same thing and was then spinning some tale about how I was two accounts, when honestly, I don't keep secondary accounts for ban avoiding, vote tampering, or self promotion. I don't see the need for that. I have ASD and ADHD and I have no ability in my head to make two accounts for that type of performance. In my head, I'm one person. Me. I don't hide behind alternate accounts. Why else would I use the same ID name across the entire Internet?

They were never going to seriously consider it in the first place. The package(s) aren't in the Fedora repo, and they just wanted to outright replace X11. It never had a snowball's chance in hell of getting accepted for the change considering it was never accepted into the main repo. Because they skipped a bunch of steps in the first place, the change proposal was, in essence, designed to fail. If the users weren't so hostile to it, and they would have "allowed" the change, they could have still rejected the change since the packages weren't accepted by Fesco in the first place. They were counting on the vocal user disapproval so they wouldn't have to pull the trump card. Now they can say exactly as you just did: that "the users don't want it" and fesco doesn't have to take a bad rap. Seems to me like it worked, did it not?

What "bunch of steps" did they skip exactly? If it didn't have a snowall's chance in hell of getting accepted, that may have been because they don't plan on keeping X11 for long anyway, not because they are hostile towards Xlibre. Granted, there are some users who didn't like it for political reasons, but as explained others had a problem with how the Xlibre developer conducted himself (allegedly) and for some technical reasons. This categorisation that Fedora is hostile is baseless and, at worst, unfair and misleading. If there is proof that Fedora is actively against Xlibre for political reasons then sure, mark it as hostile I suppose.
At least now they are marked as "Not supportive" which is a fairer category than "hostile" is. That said, the Alpine situation sounds like a candidate for the "hostile" category given the admin threatening everyone blanketly with a "coc violation" if they put forth a merge to include Xlibre. That reeks of abusive tactics.

Literally who cares if the upstream developer (XLibre) violates the CoC of a distribution (Alpine)?

A package should be welcome in a distribution as long as the package maintainers follow the CoC. There's literally no harm done in obtaining free software source code from someone you don't like and compiling & packaging it for your users.

Literally who cares if the upstream developer (XLibre) violates the CoC of a distribution (Alpine)?

A package should be welcome in a distribution as long as the package maintainers follow the CoC. There's literally no harm done in obtaining free software source code from someone you don't like and compiling & packaging it for your users.

Bingo. I mean, if you're going to be a jerk and issue CoC violations for a package's inclusion and suggestion then why bother having contributions in the first place?

All of this drama highlights a serious issue with Linux' application distribution model: it is all centralized. The repo is the gatekeeper, the repo is the mighty holy source. Any outside sources are forbidden and bad.
Windows and Apple got this right by allowing people to run installer packages or executables. Even where you can download Linux packages, they are only available for a specific release version.

Counterpoint: Flakes, AUR, PPA, Flatpak, AppImage, .deb and .rpm files.

But of course, packaging is a craft and an art, it requires skill and time and dedication.

Which rather shows that a lot of this drama is not about "freedom" or "centralization" or whatever, it is about bullying some distro volunteers into doing work nobody else wants to do while feeling righteous about it.

All of this drama highlights a serious issue with Linux' application distribution model: it is all centralized. The repo is the gatekeeper, the repo is the mighty holy source. Any outside sources are forbidden and bad. Windows and Apple got this right by allowing people to run installer packages or executables. Even where you can download Linux packages, they are only available for a specific release version.

UNIX has never been that simple. Distributions have always made their own packaging decisions. That’s why applications are distributed from upstream, so they can be built locally to conform to however that local install needs to be done.

That’s why applications being said, that is also the reason there are solutions like flatpak and app images; to reduce fragmentation and provide a just works solution. However, app images and don’t work for those solutions, as you already know. While it would be best to get the down stream, there are ways around this with PPAS, Copr, AUR, SuSE obs, and others. We don’t need to be in the distro to be in the distro. If they don’t want officially be in, fine. There are ways around it, while still being able to have a presence in the distro. It just means we’d have to find volunteers that would be willing to package it.

If manpower or skills issue are the only reasons of not including xlibre into a distro, and distro maintainers really want it, they can just ask for help (donation?) or seek for other maintainers, maybe someone are willing to take that role. If that still not work out, or because of some technical issues that cannot be solved (xlibre beta?), or other reason, I think it would better explain it in detail, and most people will understand.

But if they just filtering and only focus on the badmouth on the internet, use it to victimize themselves in the first place, I think it is clear that they just don't want it to be included in the first place. Maybe they already made their decision for whatever reason but don't want to talk about the true reason because of the current situation and political concern. Maybe not including it because of BigTech pressure (cut funding/support?) or other reason? I don't know.