On 16 Feb 2015 12:31, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Montag 16 Februar 2015, 06:13:10 schrieb Mike Frysinger: > > even then, deleting an ebuild purely due to different copyright is > > complete bs. > > The requirement for Gentoo copyright in the main tree is not optional, but > has > been policy for a very long time.
where exactly did i say i intended for it to stay that way ? i was syncing multiple things that day from CrOS and one update i missed the pointless munging of the header. had Patrick done the reasonable thing (actually talking to me), i could have fixed it fairly quickly. but lets be clear here to illustrate the inane behavior you're attempting to justify. the policy is not "it must be Gentoo copyright", but "it must have a header that says Gentoo copyright even though there's no legal basis for it". > Just because you've been around forever doesnt mean you can break the rules > that everyone else is supposed to follow. cut the crap. trying to put words into my mouth doesn't stop making them yours. -mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
