Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 236 posts

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#51

Post by pxtail »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #10

Calling it right now: If WP Engine is reading, fork WordPress now. Call it FreshPress. Put $25M into it, team up with other hosts, abandon the editor everyone hates, and relicense it to GPLv3 so Matt can’t have any of it. (Note that WordPress’s license specifically says GPLv2 or later.) Maybe support Composer like sane modern PHP projects. Maybe put the most important plugins like Woo into core and make it an all-in-…

Lol, surely they will deliver - nah, they will fork core, mirror plugins and themes repos and do absolutely minuscule minimal effort to keep it secure / bacport some changes from main WP line to keep it compatible with most of the plugins and that's all.

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#52

Post by lolinder »

sangnoir wrote: post #43
coolgoose wrote: post #8

This is definitely going a bit too crazy. I sympathized with Wordpress a lot in the initial drama, but this is going downhill fast. Blocking somebody's access to the plugin repository, not accepting their patches, and then 'releasing' your own 'secure' version is just abuse, period.

It's not inherently abusive, consider NPM resurrecting an earlier version of leftpad against author's wish. Who should provide security updates to an open source package when author no longer has access to the repository - voluntarily or otherwise?

> voluntarily or otherwise?

You say this like there's not much difference between the two, but there's a world of difference.

One is someone yanking a repo and breaking millions of builds across the world and the maintainers of npm stepping in to fix things (in a move that is still controversial, mind you).

The other is the maintainers of the WordPress plugin repository starting a self-described "nuclear war" with the plugin maintainers, banning them from the repo, publicly disclosing a security vulnerability in the plugin, then hijacking it to save the day.

One is a potentially misguided step to solve a real problem. What Matt is doing here is just cosplaying Syndrome from The Incredibles.

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#53

Post by noizejoy »

mthoms wrote: post #25

Fun fact. The new plugin uses "ACF" throughout the code, throughout the plugin reviews, and the url slug is literally "advanced-custom-fields". Guess who owns the trademark for both those things? WPEngine, that's who. https://imgur.com/a/D7YHn4e This guy is so bad at this that it's not even funny anymore.

“Under Examination”?

https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98321164&caseSearchType=U...

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#55

Post by jakelazaroff »

sangnoir wrote: post #43
coolgoose wrote: post #8

This is definitely going a bit too crazy. I sympathized with Wordpress a lot in the initial drama, but this is going downhill fast. Blocking somebody's access to the plugin repository, not accepting their patches, and then 'releasing' your own 'secure' version is just abuse, period.

It's not inherently abusive, consider NPM resurrecting an earlier version of leftpad against author's wish. Who should provide security updates to an open source package when author no longer has access to the repository - voluntarily or otherwise?

“voluntary or otherwise” is doing a ton of lifting there. Why does the original author no longer have access to the repository?

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#56

Post by getcrunk »

lolinder wrote: post #42
getcrunk wrote: post #35

A lot of the comments seem to call out Matt (right or wrong). But that’s the easy thing to do. No one dares address the systemic issue of for profit corporations exploitatively (ab)using open source software. There is a social contract that people should contribute back, and while it’s largely unenforceable, as it should be, when it’s happening on a systemic level something has to be done. And we are all complicit if…

> No one dares address the systemic issue of for profit corporations exploitatively (ab)using open source software. Calling out Matt and Automattic for their abusive behavior is addressing the systemic issue of for-profit corporations exploitatively abusing open source software. We're talking about a company that released GPL software, waited a decade for another company to build their entire business around said GPL…

Matt being a poor steward of gpl is by definition not a systemic issue … unless ur claim is that many people in positions like him do what he does which is in turn caused by invariant factors?

The systemic issue is companies the world over not giving their fair share back in terms of contributing to foss.

I might agree with most of your points, I’m just trying to get people to realize there’s the local issue of Matt/wp and then there’s this global issue of companies building businesses off foss and not giving back.

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#58

Post by jzb »

bullenweg wrote: post #33
LeoPanthera wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why on earth is Matt’s nosebleed on this? Making fun of peoples medical issues is tasteless, and makes me wonder about the motivation behind the rest of the page.

The inclusion of the nosebleed is not to make fun of Matt, it is to highlight something relevant to the medical issues that people have speculated about. The motivation is to bring to light Matt's wide-ranging exploits in one place, given it is abnormal for someone involved in high-profile litigation to spend their time arguing on Hacker News, Reddit, Twitter and live streams.

People are signaling to you that this particular thing crosses a line. You'd do well to heed that and take that part out. Speculating on his health / insinuating things undermines the points you're trying to make.

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#59

Post by mthoms »

noizejoy wrote: post #53
mthoms wrote: post #25

Fun fact. The new plugin uses "ACF" throughout the code, throughout the plugin reviews, and the url slug is literally "advanced-custom-fields". Guess who owns the trademark for both those things? WPEngine, that's who. https://imgur.com/a/D7YHn4e This guy is so bad at this that it's not even funny anymore.

“Under Examination”? https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98321164&caseSearchType=U...

>LIVE/APPLICATION/Under Examination. The trademark application has been accepted by the Office (has met the minimum filing requirements) and that this application has been assigned to an examiner.

Good catch. Looks like it was filed just under a year ago, and hasn't been finalized yet. If it is approved, I think the original filing date is considered the registration date, so Matt's usage would (at that point) qualify as infringement. However, I am NAL.

Re: The ACF plugin on the WordPress directory has been taken over by WordPress.org

#60

Post by lolinder »

getcrunk wrote: post #56
lolinder wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one dares address the systemic issue of for profit corporations exploitatively (ab)using open source software. Calling out Matt and Automattic for their abusive behavior is addressing the systemic issue of for-profit corporations exploitatively abusing open source software. We're talking about a company that released GPL software, waited a decade for another company to build their entire business around said GPL…

Matt being a poor steward of gpl is by definition not a systemic issue … unless ur claim is that many people in positions like him do what he does which is in turn caused by invariant factors? The systemic issue is companies the world over not giving their fair share back in terms of contributing to foss. I might agree with most of your points, I’m just trying to get people to realize there’s the local issue of Matt/…

> unless ur claim is that many people in positions like him do what he does which is in turn caused by invariant factors?

I don't know about invariants, but there is absolutely a trend of for-profit companies setting up a business around open source and only later trying to close the doors to lock out the competitors that the Free Software system is explicitly designed to encourage.

> this global issue of companies building businesses off foss and not giving back.

I'll never understand this complaint about not giving back. I can understand if they're asking for free support and coercing you into saying yes, but that's rarely the concern, the concern is always "giving back".

If you release it under GPL, then companies are obliged to abide by the GPL and release their modifications, nothing more or less. If you release it under a less restrictive license then they have no obligations at all, and you presumably chose that license specifically because it made the software easier to use in enterprises.

If giving back matters so very much then you're not really interested in Free Software and you should put those requirements in the license. But you don't get to piggyback on the FOSS movement and then complain when people use your software freely to compete with your for profit.

Post reply on HN