I believe this is the reason:

> They, however, embed linux-apfs into their single-commit dump, without full credit, which is a copyright violation. I thought it was their code until I found the original history.

> That tells me that they do not care to respect authorship information for open source code they incorporate, and thus makes me extremely wary that they may have also copied Apple code as part of their port. Licensing is something you have to take seriously.

https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1350382593510817795

He's arguing in bad faith.

https://twitter.com/never_released/status/135040331615765708...

then he argues that anyone shipping source in tarballs is noncompliant:

https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1350408910314721280?s=21

While Red Hat does this for RHEL and CentOS, and is standard practice in the industry:

https://twitter.com/never_released/status/135041167764109312...

Nothing to see here.

He made it clear that he won't use any of the code from elsewhere, it's an not-invented-here syndrome on steroids that will result in lots of lost time. :-(

The way I see it is he's just trying to be extremely cautious about legalities. Which should always be fair but especially when you're dealing with a corporation like Apple. It sucks that it hurts collaboration but I find it astonishing that people are trying to blame him for it when all he wants is to protect himself legally.

> then he argues that anyone shipping source in tarballs is noncompliant:

I think he might be referring to the section 2a of GPLv2 (5a of GPLv3) which require keeping track of modifications to the source code. I've never seen this clause being enforced, though. (IANAL)

I also wishes there were some sort of collaboration rather than an outright dismissal.

It's a tantrum, he'll probably come to his senses a few days later. And then those issues can be cleaned up.