Linux Foundation

Alexander Couzens lynxis at
Sun Mar 5 18:54:03 EST 2017

On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:02:30 +0100
John Crispin <john at> wrote:

> Hi All,
> @Imre: Thanks for the mail, I hope that we will manage to go the final
> steps to resolve this one way or the other
> @Zoltan: i agree with what you say, however during that meeting we
> concluded that we will all work with the best intent to remerge.
> However due to the rules and governance system of LEDE we will need
> to make a vote about remerge and rebranding. The 3 remaining OWRT
> devs were all given full commit and voting rights within the LEDE
> project so that you can obviously take part in this vote.
> @Felix, David: I fully agree with what you said about LF and the
> reasons given.
> @jow: also agree with what you say.
> @daniel: as usual spot on, it pretty much sums up the doubt/fear that
> most LEDE devs have
> @lede: everyone, its time to say what you think. people have made a
> start now and your opinion is valid and important whether it is pro
> or con
> Maybe we can speed this process up a bit. I get the impression that
> everyone is eager to remerge and that the branding is the actual topic
> that is blocking this. We could simply make 2 votes

> 1) do we want to remerge
Isn't this already done, as all OpenWrt devs have vote and commit
rights to LEDE? AFAIK we agreed to merge both codebases.

Or I misunderstood what "remerge" means?
I don't know exactly on what I'm voting here

> 2) do we want to rebrand
I don't like the name OpenWrt, IMHO this limits the use to wireless
So this is a *No*.

But I'm open for a new name, but also okay with LEDE.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the openwrt-adm mailing list