That project background reads suspicious as all hell, but then the thing does do what it says on the tin from all the news I see, so go figure.

▲

mbananasynergy 2 days ago | parent [-]

Hi, GrapheneOS community manager here.

There are some corrections that we have contacted the author about regarding the history of the project. They initially e-mailed us to ask a few questions but seems to have maybe misunderstood something.

For clarity, GrapheneOS is the continuation of CopperheadOS, not a new project that spun off from it.

As an example, it can be seen that our repositories and legacy bugtrackers are ours:

-https://github.com/GrapheneOS/platform_manifest/forks?includ...

-https://github.com/GrapheneOS/platform_bionic/forks?include=...

-https://github.com/GrapheneOS-Archive/legacy_bugtracker/issu...

It's a direct continuation, but was renamed to GrapheneOS post the failed takeover attempt. GrapheneOS has persevered and is all the stronger for it. Over a decade now. :)

▲

onli 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

That is not correct, or at best a very questionable interpretation. Graphene is a continuation of the open source side of copperhead, but the copperhead project continued to exist even though the Graphene dev sabotaged it by deleting the cryptographic keys. Copperhead is the continuation of copperhead is my reading, Graphene is just also a continuation in a different project.

Why lie about something so easy to disprove by a bit of research? There were a bunch of articles about this back then, even wikipedia states it clearly.

	▲	other8026 a day ago \| parent [-]
		Did you look at the links? > Fuzion24 / platform_manifest Created 10 years ago Updated 10 years ago

▲

perching_aix 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Ah sorry, might have been unclear: by background, I meant the current governance and contributions situation they describe in the post.