On 05/19/2018 04:41 PM, Christian Rebischke via aur-general wrote:
Oh dear.. the behaviour of these palemoon people is so ridiculous and rude. I suggest we support openBSD and just delete the package. If they don't want users they don't get any.
Their browser isn't 'that' good at all...
just my 2 cents
If the maintainer and users don't want the package, then we can certainly accede to the request to delete an unpopular package. If we're going to specifically delete this package in retaliation for people with bad attitude, we'd establish a precedent that users are not allowed to maintain AUR packages if the Trusted User team dislikes the upstream. I don't want to go there. :p Rejecting it from [community] is another matter entirely, but I don't believe any poor soul tried to add it to [community] to begin with... :p If we're going to specifically delete this package due to trademark concerns, we'd better be sure that that is consistent with the legal position of the AUR, and presumably consider how the many other proprietary packages fit into that worldview. I'm fairly certain our stance has always been that with the exception of aiding and abetting software that is intrinsically illegal... everything we do falls under the category of "telling users how to do it themselves", which means we cannot, in fact, be infringing to my knowledge, and therefore cannot in good faith delete basilisk for this reason. Should we bring out our crack team of lawyers held on retainer for situations like this? :D -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User