On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No-one is claiming that Paludis is an official Gentoo project. This discussion, however, is about PMS, not Paludis, and the only reason I can see to keep confusing them is political, so please stop doing that.
Sorry, the reason is not political.
Nor do I define the direction of PMS. The requirements define its direction, and its contributors (the majority of which are Gentoo developers) do the writing.
But you appear to act as the project lead for PMS. I am only trying to understand this as someone who has just recently started getting up to speed on PMS. It honestly appears as if you are the project lead for PMS, and you speak as if you have authority for the PMS project, and you are not a Gentoo developer, yet you claim that PMS is an official Gentoo project? That is confusing to me. I am not trying to pick on you or harass you but I am seeing something that appears on the surface to be a clear violation of what I understand to be Gentoo policy. That's confusing to me.
> Paludis does not have a Gentoo Foundation copyright, does PMS? Not currently, but then neither does devmanual, so it's hardly unique in that respect.
That also means that the devmanual and PMS are not (currently) official Gentoo projects. Any official Gentoo project needs to hold a Gentoo Foundation copyright and be released under the appropriate license - otherwise it is not being adequately protected. I would be extremely surprised if this policy has changed. -Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
