Why a fork and not a contribution back to main?
I stepped back from the Tusky project earlier this year, after contributing to that project for about 8 months (~ 150 PRs), running the two previous releases (Tusky v22 and v23), and being the main (or possibly only) person posting from the @tusky account for ~ 2 months.
Stepping back from the Tusky project — nikclayton sets out why I stepped back from the project. It’s the failures of project governance there, and a clear lack of willingness to address them, that made me think a fork was reasonable.
In particular, if I’m going to talk the talk I should be prepared to walk the walk.
The lack of project governance with the project was noted as an ongoing issue as recently as Oct 30th by @connyduck, Tusky maintainer (Conny Duck: "Tusky" - chaos.social).
What is the relationship with the Tusky developers/project?
There isn’t one.
The Tusky project produced a statement that repeatedly lied (Update #2 on "Stepping back" — nikclayton onwards).
Since then two more members of the project have resigned, one of whom I believe was bought on specifically to work on the issues I raised. I do not know why they resigned.
It’s been more than three months since the Tusky project put out a release, effectively stranding the contributions that people have made to the project in the interim time (features, bug fixes, and translations). There is a “nightly” build, but that’s used by less than ~ 5% of the userbase (at the time I left, I don’t know those numbers now).
From what I’ve seen (and I appreciate that this may come across as harsh, but I think it’s important to speak clearly) the Tusky project is an object lesson in what happens when an open source project becomes an integral part of many peoples’ experience of a service, but with no workable plan to scale and govern the project accordingly.
As the user base increases so do the number of feature requests and bug reports, with the communication and project management burden that that brings.
This leads to maintainer burnout, with its associated human cost.
This is not to cast blame – the sudden influx in November 2022 took everyone by surprise. But the project has not been able to adapt, or prioritise adapting.
Are any of the (now former?) Tusky developers working on this one?
Not at the moment. Given the project’s statement and the refutation I posted I would be surprised if any of them were to contribute.
That said, contributions from anyone, whether it’s in the form or PRs or not, is always welcome.