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

Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

andre.arko.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#51

Post by bradly »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #17
eowyn wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this was the last statement from Ruby Central: https://youtu.be/VyCiE3GjQps?si=QgY1sa_w-59jJjQ3 This topic seems to be in a holding pattern now. People are waiting to see how Ruby Central responds. Some are hoping for the Q&A to be rescheduled or at least another statement

In this, the year of someone's lord 2025, surely there's a non-video version, right?

There was a Gist posted of the transcript: https://gist.github.com/schneems/8f5179c8fa3d57cb6025d9e62c1...

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#52

Post by yunohn »

bdcravens wrote: post #22

I realize this will come off as snide, and result in downvotes, but looking to the success of Ruby and Rails today, the "community" is as much the money that's been poured into the ecosystem as it is the warm fuzzies and volunteers. Without the millions of dollars companies like Heroku, Shopify, Basecamp, Github, 37 Signals, and others have spent in terms of money and developer-hours, the projects we know and love wo…

Very unclear if you read the post and understood that the author is actually a full blown OSS contributor and maintainer - and the point of the post is that they built Bundler, which Ruby Central has now “stolen”.

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#53

Post by ChrisArchitect »

Related:

Shopify, pulling strings at Ruby Central, forces Bundler and RubyGems takeover

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45348390

Ruby Central's Attack on RubyGems

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45299170

A board member's perspective of the RubyGems controversy

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45325792

I'm leaving Ruby Central

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45352432

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#54

Post by Aurornis »

em-bee wrote: post #35
Aurornis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Until a week ago, the trademark was (arguably) being used by a community owned project as desired. The community isn’t a legal entity. Saying that it’s owned by a public community with no boundaries or membership is equivalent to saying it’s genericized or abandoned. Even if it was, that would undermine this trademark registration which was registered by a single individual.

that wouldn't matter though, would it? a genericized trademark is not the problem. the problem is ruby central wanting to take control of the name/trademark. if they want the trademark now, they now have to fight, and if in that fight, it is established that nobody gets to own the trademark, then the current trademark registration would have achieved its goal.

If nobody owns the trademark then they're free to use it.

The person who wrote this post tried to register the trademark to prevent them from using it. If the trademark is determined to be abandoned and generic then they cannot stop Ruby Central from using it.

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#55

Post by Aurornis »

joshuap wrote: post #31
Aurornis wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Funding open source work doesn’t confer ownership A true donation wouldn’t confer ownership, but in this case there are actual organizations and legal structures involved that did confer ownership.

Please explain - which organizations and legal structures, and how did they confer ownership? Be specific.

It's explained in the article with a direct link to the merger agreement

https://andre.arko.net/2025/09/25/bundler-belongs-to-the-rub...

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#56

Post by Aurornis »

type0 wrote: post #39
Aurornis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Until a week ago, the trademark was (arguably) being used by a community owned project as desired. The community isn’t a legal entity. Saying that it’s owned by a public community with no boundaries or membership is equivalent to saying it’s genericized or abandoned. Even if it was, that would undermine this trademark registration which was registered by a single individual.

> owned by a public community with no boundaries or membership is membership in github org is still a membership

A GitHub org is not a legal entity.

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#57

Post by philipwhiuk »

eowyn wrote: post #9
colinbartlett wrote: post #5

Has there been any attempt from Ruby Central to undo the damage they caused? Can anyone comment on the current state of affairs?

I think this was the last statement from Ruby Central: https://youtu.be/VyCiE3GjQps?si=QgY1sa_w-59jJjQ3 This topic seems to be in a holding pattern now. People are waiting to see how Ruby Central responds. Some are hoping for the Q&A to be rescheduled or at least another statement

For a video claiming to have a timeline was awfully short on dates.

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#58

Post by nyeah »

bdcravens wrote: post #22

I realize this will come off as snide, and result in downvotes, but looking to the success of Ruby and Rails today, the "community" is as much the money that's been poured into the ecosystem as it is the warm fuzzies and volunteers. Without the millions of dollars companies like Heroku, Shopify, Basecamp, Github, 37 Signals, and others have spent in terms of money and developer-hours, the projects we know and love wo…

You're right. To me, "gem install" and "cute stickers" come off as snide remarks. Maybe that's partly because you directed those comments at someone who claims to have done major development work.

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#59

Post by nyeah »

bdcravens wrote: post #29
dbalatero wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell what point you're trying to make here?

That dismissing the concerns of organizations, big and small, that have contributed to Ruby's success is intellectually dishonest.

I'm having trouble finding a specific meaning here. Has some concern been dismissed? By who?

Re: Bundler Belongs to the Ruby Community

#60

Post by em-bee »

Aurornis wrote: post #54
em-bee wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that wouldn't matter though, would it? a genericized trademark is not the problem. the problem is ruby central wanting to take control of the name/trademark. if they want the trademark now, they now have to fight, and if in that fight, it is established that nobody gets to own the trademark, then the current trademark registration would have achieved its goal.

If nobody owns the trademark then they're free to use it. The person who wrote this post tried to register the trademark to prevent them from using it. If the trademark is determined to be abandoned and generic then they cannot stop Ruby Central from using it.

but ruby central using the trademark is not the problem. as long as everyone else can use it too. but ruby central wants to prevent everyone else to use it, and that's the problem.

if the trademark is determined to be generic, then ruby central can not prevent anyone from using it.

the goal is not to stop ruby central from using the trademark. the goal is to stop them from claiming ownership.

Post reply on HN