LEDE/OpenWrt Merger thoughts?

Talk about Documentation
#3

All of that, assuming that I understand correctly what the merge means -- that
the infrastructure, management and ownership issues with everything
OpenWrt-related have been or could be resolved. If they haven't and we're
talking about LEDE absorbing current OpenWrt development efforts only, then
it's a whole different subject.

The plan is that LEDE will absorb all of the OpenWRT infrastructure, there are
still issues to be worked out (copy from LEDE wiki to OpenWRT wiki or
vice-versa, which forum software to use), but the biggest stumbling block right
now is the name.

PS. I do agree that OpenWrt name reminds of/implies a specific vendor and
series of products, however it hasn't been a strong enough reason to change
the name in the past, and with both OpenWRT and DD-WRT supporting multitude of
different vendors/devices for many years now I don't think it creates any
confusion.

I agree, WRT has referred to things other than WRT routers for long enough
that being worried about this isn't reasonable.

The other concern some have voiced is that the OpenWRT name reminds them of the
bad management experiences that they had as developers in a project with that
name.

Personally, I think the google history and the number of third party websites
that refer to OpenWRT are significant enough that even if the project changes
it's name, it's going to need to maintain pages at the openwrt.org name, with
redirections and explinations of the name change for at least a decade.

As an advocate, I cringe at the fact that I would have to explain to people that
LEDE is the replacement for OpenWRT, and then be faced with the problem of
trying to answer "why did they do that" without dredging up the dirty laundry
again.

We saw these sorts of problems with gcc -> egcs (before they combined back into
gcc) and still suffer it to some extent with OpenOffice vs LibreOffice. I'm sure
many other examples can be raised.

David Lang

#4

Besides naming I would make a big vote for Discourse as forum software.

#5

empty and worthless discussions. why would there be a merge? if there's already resources, time and effort wasted for creating this project and maintaining it, why would someone want merging back? not enough buggy drivers to fix so you're asking for more unnecessary work ha?

#6

I prefer the name LEDE because I think OpenWRT reflects the old world of replacing stock firmware on consumer wireless routers as oppose to embedded Linux whether a wireless device or not. This is the future focus and will capture future users. Wireless is just a addon to the platform. Not the platform itself. Wireless router, Ethernet switch, protocol translator, intelligent watch, phone or whatever...LEDE everywhere :slight_smile:

OpenWRT is a replacement OS for consumer routers. LEDE, while starting from there, is an embedded linux project. I don't think this something OpenWRT / DD-WRT will ever capture. WRT is a throw back to the original router port. LEDE simply makes more sense in the world of IoT. Google will catch up quickly once OpenWRT is redirected.

It is true OpenWRT has a history but I can't help but feel going back to the old name is a step back. Great momentum here. Lets not spend any more time or resources considering what happened beyond welcoming the rest of the OpenWRT team to the new project.

Secondly, please keep this forum software. Love it.

#7

I think there are many reasons to merge. Some, the technical ones, have straightforward solutions that need to be worked out by both teams to capture the best parts of their work.

But the split left many raw feelings, and I am pleased that the principals are willing to meet and strive to create a good working relationship so that everyone can be as involved as they wish.

So, No... Not "empty and worthless discussions."

#8

"both teams" seriously? can you list members of each team?

#9

If I (just a regular LEDE user, no developer) can state my opinion here: To developers, power users and the like it probably doesn't matter how the project is called, because they will know what the software is about no matter what the name is. But a technically interested person, who only likes to tinkle with his router once in a while, a catchy name could be important. Because they might recognize that name or remember it later. And OpenWRT as a name is just way more spread and known than LEDE.

Therefore: OpenWRT (as a name) +1

Just my two cents!

1 Like
#10

I couldn't agree more.

#11

"both teams" seriously? can you list members of each team?

I could if I were to dig through the list archives, or the wiki history that
lists the contributers.

But at this point, all OpenWRT devs are also LEDE devs, and there is little work
being done only on OpenWRT.

Development wise, the merge has mostly happened already. The question now is how
to eliminate duplication of effort and how to avoid abandoning the OpenWRT
and/or LEDE communitites.

Getting the resources of OpenWRT added to LEDE would be a win.

Getting the community that exists around OpenWRT (much of which doesn't know
about LEDE) to contribute to the combined project would be a win.

David Lang

#12

and how about just picking a new name (as jow suggested ["...rebrand?" - "yes, but not to openWrt"])?

does anyone have a cool idea?

#13

I believe the "LEDE" name has already caught traction - people are more familiar with the name each day.

1 Like
#14

+1 for keeping LEDE

If they want to join then they have to the the LEDE way and accept its setup (infra, workflow, rules and so on).

I am not getting it - why merging?
Why changing LEDE - it does well I think?

1 Like
#15

I am not getting it - why merging?

because OpenWRT has a very large name recognition and community around it. LEDE
forked because of management/policy issues 'under the covers' that the community
never saw. OpenWRT has resources that would be useful to LEDE.

It's pretty much a given that the LEDE policies are going to be what run the
combined group. That's not the question.

Why changing LEDE - it does well I think?

That's the question, for a lot of people it doesn't mean anything yet. And as
one of the devs pointed out, telling someone that you are a 'lead' (the official
pronouciation) developer doesn't mean anything. the fact that they don't have
the domain lede and instead have to use lede-project is another negative with
the name, it's not a good googleable term

David Lang

#16

I do a google search for "lede" and the site comes up first. As for the pronunciation I always called it LEDE not lead. But I didn't know there was an official one.

#17

when i search for this site I always look up "ledeproject" which takes me directly to the website. to be honest, im sure people will get into the habit of simply typing ledeproject (or stick to "lede" as its close enough to get to the website)

Additionally, it doesn't seem like people are having trouble finding this website - as for proof, just check the stats page Curious about LEDE web site statistics? in fact, the numbers are growing
overtime looking for this website will naturally become easier. As of recent, when I search "lede" in google, its the 3rd on the list following the two dictionary type websites

1 Like
#18

My opinion is that the merge is fine if and only if the LEDE practices are resumed - voting, infrastructure, builds and so on.

Regarding the name - I still visit both forums, but that's more for a legacy reason - the owrt one is on my homepage and lede isn't. The lede site, wiki and forum I like better though I would like to see some more categories - Plugins, Builds, Hardware, Installation and so on.

The name owrt is more popular and while there is some discussion regarding the name been associated with bad management and so on the majority of us the users will either gloss over that or be ignorant.

t3hn00b's 2 cents

#19

All that needs to be done is to transfer many of the forum posts on openwrt forums to the lede forums then auto redirect the openwrt website and forums to the lede website and forums. FINISHED.

#20

My wish would be to not copy the OpenWRT wiki, because there ist so much old crap in it. So many old versions of something, not updated in years, and redundant information especially in the device specific pages. Yes if you search long enough you will probably find the solution, but boy does it waste a lot of time to get there...

#21

My wish would be to not copy the OpenWRT wiki, because there ist so much old
crap in it. So many old versions of something, not updated in years, and
redundant information especially in the device specific pages. Yes if you
search long enough you will probably find the solution, but boy does it waste
a lot of time to get there...

I would agree if we had the manpower to go through it and only pull the 'good
stuff', but without that time, something that takes time to find the right
answer is better than not having the answer there. OpenWRT has tried a couple
times to declare everything 'legacy' and start from scratch (at least, that's
what it's looked like from the outside), and it hasn't worked well due to the
manpower shortage.

David Lang

#22

While I don't really care about the name as a whole I think keeping LEDE or whatever they settle for is a good thing. The OpenWRT name doesn't really represent the project goal(s) anymore and it would also be a good change since you would get rid of loads of inaccurate information as many guides/tutorials doesn't even tell which version they are written for etc. Same goes with the wiki, review each submission as it's cluttered with lots of incorrect information and the layout is very inconsistent.

1 Like