Comment by res0nat0r
5 years ago
He just doesn't want anything of his included in nixpkgs because he doesn't want to deal with anyone opening Github issues against his repos if there happen to be build / installation issues that are coming from some kind of failure in the nixpkgs install / build process.
That's speculative on his part (noone has opened any issues with him, neither coming from nixos nor from any other repackaging).
The nixos guys also offered various proposals to him to completely avoid any support burden on his part, all of which he roundly rejected.
Seems he's just being unreasonable for the sake of it tbh; I can't see any logical reasoning behind it all.
Not sure why I'm being downvoted for what he explicitly lays out from the link above:
> Seems he's just being unreasonable for the sake of it tbh; I can't see any logical reasoning behind it all.
I agree.
> That's speculative on his part (noone has opened any issues with him, neither coming from nixos nor from any other repackaging).
Which is the whole point of acting on it before it happens...
It's crazy the amount of entitlement I see toward open-source developers. You don't like his stance, then fork it and support it yourself. You are already lucky to have a good base to work on, you shouldn't even be entitled to that!
They explicitly offered to do that, and also suggested 3 other solutions to address his concern, and he shot all suggestions down with what amounted to "I already told you what I want: Don't repackage my code."
The only entitlement form the nixos devs has been using a right which Frenck explicitly chose to provide when licensing his software.
In the end, the will have to fork it, and probably maintain a fork of HM, since he is relicensing it to disallow repackaging.
Also they offered various options to appease the author including code forking and the author rejected them all. Basically the team exhausted all of their options to make this author happy but the author seem not to understand the reality of FOSS. This author shouldn't be in the FOSS if the author is going to roadblock every options despite his licensing explicitly allows including the codes.
Agreed. If he wants to be stubborn like this he just should change his licensing so it can't be included anywhere else upstream and that would put an end to it.