"Blimey! I thought the idea of such open projects was that several people contributed and that seems to be what Thomas and Herbert did."
I've no idea what happened in this case, and I'm not really interested in getting drawn into the politics. But, Peter's complaint seems to be that he wasn't contacted before the other version of Samba was made available.
Things would seem to have been clouded by the announcement of Peter's sabbatical, but it's generally courteous (although not a requirement) to drop the maintainer of an open-source project a line before doing something like this. You may simply get told to go ahead, or you may learn of later work that has been done to the source and be asked if you would like to help with that. Herbert seems to have said that he didn't contact Peter, because he (reasonably) thought that Peter had taken a break from RISC OS stuff for a while.
What I can say is this: I've got at least one public domain title hosted on my website, which I kind-of maintain (when I've got the time). I can't stop someone deciding I'm useless and releasing their own version, but I know I'd be furious if someone did so without letting me know: not least because I've done a hell of a lot of work on the source since the last released version. Seeing someone else decide to pull the rug out from under me, rather than asking if they can help and *co-operate*, would certainly make me very seriously question why I bother doing any work for RISC OS users for free.
I hope that puts the other perspective to this debate. As I said, I don't particularly wish to comment on the specifics, not least because I am not involved. I also have a certain sympathy for both sides' positions.
...and yes, there is an update pending to IcnClipBrd, when I'm not snowed under with Wakefield stuff. Apologies to those waiting for bug fixes.