[packman] New packages for packman (Walter Fey)

[Pascal Bleser]

2017-08-01 18:02 GMT+02:00 Richard Brown <RBrownCCB at opensuse.org>:
> On Tue 1. Aug 2017 at 15:33, Luigi Baldoni <aloisio at gmx.com> wrote:
[...]
>> If so I suspect it's related to the missing header with copyright
>> attribution to SUSE AG.
>>
>> Now, the question is: would Packman be ok with that?
>
> I would hope the answer is "no"

It seems to me that the conflict here comes from a different
interpretation of how things happened.
I might be wrong but from what I've read, I'm under the impression that
- Walter says that he has maintained those spec files since years and,
hence, he is the copyright holder on the spec files, and in that case,
there would be no problem building and hosting them at Packman (*)
- Richard says that he took bits of spec files that were not his
copyright and/or had the copyright attribution to SUSE, and removed
those in the process
Maybe Walter means that he solely wants to base his packages in
Packman on his very own spec files.

(*) that being said...
I'm in no position to influence anything as I've pretty much retired
from everything, but as probably everyone knows, I have maintained a
lot of packages at Packman in the past, for quite a while.
Based on that experience, my personal opinion is that hamradio
packages have absolutely nothing to do on Packman.
MPlayer yes, hamradio? no. That is really not the purpose of Packman.
It's not a dissidence from the openSUSE project (even though it was a
bit of that in the olden days, before the openSUSE project started
:)), it's a complementary (and important) service to its community.

Is there maybe a way to resolve what seems to be a misunderstanding
(or misrepresentation of events), and keep those packages on the
openSUSE OBS ? (even though the tone of discourse makes it seem as if
it's already too late for that..)

> If Packman receives packages which clearly remove the legal copyright
> attribution of previous authors, Packman would need to be prepared for
> serious conversations with the copyright holder who's attributions are
> being removed.
> This is a very serious situation which fundamentally undermines the legal
> basis under which free and open source licenses operate, so is taken very
> seriously by corporations that run their business in compliance with those
> licenses.

Richard, seriously, those gratuitous threats...
Nothing happened, why are you throwing those around ? (including the
bit in a latter post you made..)