On Fri, May 21, 2021, 4:36 PM mar77i via aur-general < aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
IMHO, as it is very tricky to distribute a patch file without copyright, a better solution for AUR maintainers is to creat patch files including the upstream copyright and then host the files somewhere else. AUR will not be liable to such legal headache anymore, and the patch file owner enjoys
-‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Friday, May 21, 2021 10:25 PM, Manhong Dai via aur-general < aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote: the
deserved credit all by himself while taking the full liability too. After all, AUR seems to be a public community for now and TU works for free for now too.
You know how fugly that is? If my domain where I store my source code gets nuked because I get hit by a bus, nobody else may know what the patch's content was. Sure, I could be less "anti-social" and just use github like too many other people, but I don't like being forced to do so. There was a similar discussion on the topic in the pypi community recently, where the problem of too many things hosted elsewhere is raised in the same way.
https://discuss.python.org/t/what-to-do-about-gpus-and-the-built-distributio...
As long as other people ever downloaded your patch files, everything is fine no matter your website is nuked or you get hit by a bus. Actually your logic applies to AUR too, are you worried about AUR is nuked? Best, Manhong
cheers! mar77i
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.