well that piece of code currently does not have your name or anything about you in github. So I am not sure how he did any better than me. And when he says I only changed the name of things in his code that is not true. What he is showing are the new names in a new and unique program. It was not his code .
1 Like
If one wants credit one should put proper header comments with a copyright and mention of the license (or, if the license is short like the MIT license, the full text of the license) at the top of each source file. That is what I do â that way you can keep track of who licensed what as what while avoiding debacles like this. And then one has a right to complain if someone removes oneâs copyright or changes oneâs license without permission. Simply putting a LICENSE or COPYING file at the root of the repo isnât sufficient because source files easily get separated from such.
3 Likes
And seriously, a YouTube video? Really? Good job de-escalating things.
4 Likes
your comment is nowhere to be found. youtube counts 21 comments but only 18 are visible (youtube uploaders have full control over the comment sections of their videos and can arbitrarily approve which ones to show). just saying
2 Likes
Seems pretty simple to me. Itâs petty to pull down a repo after clearly getting called out and lying about whether or not the code was copied. Stop moving the goal posts. Anyone who wants to blame the person for pointing that out is clearly just supporting a childâs mentality that you can take whatever code without following open source guidelines. Iâve been following the threads here and I am not seeing a fostering community for the most part even before I knew about jblanked. As far as making content explaining and bringing eyes to this stuff jblanked has done an outstanding job and Iâve only recently stumbled across him so I donât blame him for making a video when 90% of the comments against him donât even deal with the heart of the issue. He brought it up in a thread wasnât insulting about it and then Neusse rudely talks past him from the start. If anyone acted wrong it was him he couldâve replied letâs take this off line etc⌠not deflect and not even acknowledge his initial statement
@Neusse unless you care about protecting a fragile ego it would be best for you and the community to reopen that GitHub, admit you were wrong for lying, and move on. Itâs up to the community to make sure these types of issues dont get out of control.
Anyone who doesnât like how someone does their project can just fork and do their own thing. How is that so difficult to understand? Donât harass someone because they have their own way of doing things. Youâre talking about niches within niches but canât help being passive aggressive to other members? think ahead and support those who are bringing new projects, awareness, and compatibility to everyone with no expectation of payment. Not those who detract by pulling down their work because they get called out and purposefully putting a target on others back. Please do better
2 Likes
your comment here comes off as an ad hominem attack of the character of jblanked for a perceived hypocritical view of this situation. The difference is that he complied and didnât pull down anything so not sure what this accomplishes. You act like itâs a cardinal sin to bring that up in a forum. all of this can be preceded by the fact that Neusse started off by being passive to jblanked from the start. Donât be disingenuous about it.
Also letâs not forget that it is no longer private because you decided to bring it up both here and the video comments as you said. Again not sure what this accomplishes
Hereâs my attempt to close the loop on this thread so we can all move on.
-
Credit / sourcing: Some pieces in my CircuitPython work did originate from Picoware and other upstream sources (notably the keyboard/southbridge path), and I should have made that unambiguous in the repo (headers/README/notice file) from day one. I said it in the forum early, but I didnât execute it cleanly in the repository itself. Thatâs on me.
-
Where I misspoke: My wording created unnecessary confusion (and I got defensive). The accurate statement is: I wrote a lot of CircuitPython-specific structure and apps, and there were files/sections that were adapted from existing work. Whether something is âcompatibleâ at runtime doesnât change that attribution still matters when code is reused/adapted.
-
Why the GitHub went private: I pulled the repo down because the conversation turned into a forensic hunt, and it stopped being productive. Iâm not interested in a public back-and-forth where people pile on or score points. Taking it down was me hitting pauseânot trying to âwin,â âhide,â or disrespect anyone.
-
What Iâm doing next (so this ends):
-
If I re-publish anything, it will be cleanly sourced: clear README credit, per-file headers where appropriate, and a THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES style file listing what came from where and under what license.
-
If thatâs not possible (or if it keeps turning into drama), Iâll simply keep the work private and/or rewrite anything questionable before sharing again.
- Request to the thread: Please stop with the personal accusations and dog-piling. If someone has a specific sourcing concern, send it to me privately with the exact file/section and what you believe the upstream is. Iâm not going to litigate this further in public.
I appreciate the people who were excited about CircuitPython on PicoCalc, and I also respect the people who care about attribution. Iâm stepping back from this thread after this post.
7 Likes
I respect your right to do what you want but we saw the changes from picoware to picocalc⌠the fact you choose to rewrite from scratch rather then take some time offline with jblanked to find out where this misunderstanding is and how to resolve it but you painted a target on jblanked back. So again this is beyond petty. No one would have been combing over your code if you were straight from the start. Now you took the repo down with the threat that if drama continues you will keep it private. Give me a break this is so disingenuous. Look the moment you decide to take the repo down everyone started dog pilling on jblanked so I guess youâre happy about that? Again do better
I hear what youâre saying.
-
On âpainting a targetâ / dogpiling: I donât want anyone piling on anyone here, including jblanked. If my actions contributed to that, Iâm sorry â that wasnât my intent. Iâm explicitly asking people to stop making it personal.
-
On âwhy not resolve it offline firstâ: In hindsight, I shouldâve paused sooner and taken the conversation offline before it got heated. Iâm willing to talk with jblanked directly to clear up what was reused vs rewritten and what needs attribution.
-
On âdisingenuous threatâ / taking the repo down: This isnât a threat. Itâs a boundary. The repo was turning into a public courtroom instead of a project, so I took it down to prevent more noise while I clean up attribution properly. If I re-publish, itâll be with clear credits, license notes, and a third-party notices file so thereâs no ambiguity.
-
On âstraight from the startâ: I did acknowledge early that some parts were based on existing work, but I agree the repo itself should have been clearer and I should have handled that better from day one.
Iâm not going to keep arguing motives or trading accusations in public. If someone has a specific concern, send me the exact file/section and upstream reference privately â Iâll either attribute it correctly, replace it, or remove it. Iâm stepping away from this thread after this message.
3 Likes
welcome to the forum!
1 Like
What I was attempting to say:
- We all make mistakes
- Perhaps next time @jblanked should try working with people one on one instead publicly
- I have no problem with @jblanked because we sorted it out together quickly and respectfully
Our conversation is still private since you do not know what we discussed or how we resolved it.
1 Like
Wow, talk about escalating with the TURBO onâŚ
How many of us did look at the timestamps before having impulses to take sides? @Neusse wasnât granted much time at all to properly check or update the files of his repo (beyond maybe just README.md). Similarly here in this thread. And this time-aspect I do consider IMPOLITE. Regardless of the original offense.
That said, Move on, move on,
P.
In the comments section you need to switch âSort byâ from âTop (Show featured comments)â to âNewest (Show recent comments, including potential spam)â.
The world is crazy enough as it is. Please donât argue, respect each other and each otherâs achievements. Citing sources should go without saying: in that respect, the correction was appropriate from my perspective. The subsequent discussion was an unnecessary waste of time.
The PicoCalc is fantastic in its own right. I love using it, more for the sheer enjoyment of it, to quickly and directly program small âbuilding physicsâ applications with MMBasic, for example. Thatâs perfectly sufficient for me: Python would only make sense if I could write the code directly on the PicoCalc. But of course, porting Python to the PicoCalc is quite an achievement.
Many websites on the internet contain code that isnât properly cited: thatâs not okay in itself⌠but for a simple program, such as making an LED blink or displaying âHello World,â the possibilities for individual coding or⌠The solution is certainly more limited; a bit more flexibility would be welcome here 
All the best to everyone!
p.s. I used Google-Translate
2 Likes
Sarcasm mode: ON
This is the first post I read after signing up, and weâre off to a great start!
Sarcasm mode: OFF
This is very sad. All they had to do was fork Picoware and modify it. What a wasted opportunity to see a great project.
Oh well⌠Who knows if anyone else will want to try something similar.
1 Like
Yeah, my thought was ânice job promoting the communityâ â what could have been resolved politely in private was instead handled via a completely unnecessary public badgering complete with YouTube video such that we donât get to see and use Neusseâs work as theyâve been badgered into pulling their repo. Regardless of who was technically in the right all I can say is thanks a lot.
5 Likes
I feel like my response to this whole matter probably hasnât been helpful here. While I sympathize with @Neusse and while I simultaneously really wish they would reconsider their choice to take their repo private, I probably have been a bit over the top in my response to this whole matter. Regardless of who is technically in the right, and regardless of what code was whose originally, I wish this matter could be resolved rather than just left in its current state.
@jblanked, if @Neusse made their repo public again with proper attributions, including with regard to the code originally written by @BlairLeduc, could you accept things as such? Note that removing the aforementioned YouTube video would probably be seen as an act of goodwill in this department that would go far in helping settle this matter.
1 Like
[not holding my breath]