Linux dev quits after "personal attacks" from user over antivirus tool (neowin.net)

It's basically an open source rite of passage to be harassed by entitled jerk users. I wish people weren't so nasty online.

While the developer's decision must be respected, I don't really understand it. Why not simply ban the troll instead of engaging with them in any way? I wouldn't want to give a troll any power or influence at all.

Note that "Linux dev" in this context means "person who develops for linux", not "contributor to linux kernel".

I think it is a bid problematic that anybody can create an account on github and open issues there (if enabled). No "professional", paid software would allow ordinary users to communicate directly with the programmer. Or allow outsiders to post comments on their products website. Just moving discussions to irc would already filter a lot of spam. As a last resort you could require some kind of proof that you are a maintainer of a bigger distribution. Or something in between.

The angry, insecure and unwell are over-represented in technical forums.

I find I am typically only browsing this site when I am not ready to present the best version of myself (tired, bored, demotivated).

I don't know how we end the cycle of cruelty in our industry.

when we say "Linux dev" we usually mean kernel development. It'd be nice if the headline reflected the actual project.

Respect them not wanting to deal with arseholes.

This sounds useful, I'll be building it and having a try.

> LoucheBear

> Joined on Jul 25, 2025

Probably a paid troll by a state actor would be my guess.

As the former community manager for ClamAV, there could have been some work done here to correct the situation and make both parties happy. I know ClamAV doesn't want to see third party utilities go away, and it's beneficial to the community for them to exist. Trolls exist, but there are ways to deal with them. I ran ClamAV and Snort for about 15 years, and we had plenty of heat over the years. This could have been avoided.

Now hold on a minute. I'm reading the Codeberg posts, and I think Neowin is getting it wrong. The LoucheBear person seems to be saying that their ClamAV scan is clean without Kapitano, but not clean with Kapitano. Anyone want to grab the flatpak quick, just to see if somehow some malware hitched a ride?

Anyway, if I'm reading this right, then these two people are just talking past one another, not understanding what the other is talking about.

Off-topic: It's absolutely mad from a security perspective that you can't download flatpaks as a simple bzip file for security analysis.