| 1 |
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Patrick Lauer (patrick) |
| 4 |
>> <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > patrick 14/12/31 05:21:11 |
| 6 |
>> > |
| 7 |
>> > Removed: ChangeLog Manifest libusbhp-1.0.2.ebuild |
| 8 |
>> > metadata.xml |
| 9 |
>> > Log: |
| 10 |
>> > QA: Remove package with invalid copyright |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> you do not go reverting code without actually talking to people. if |
| 13 |
>> you feel like a revert is necessary, then file a bug. putting a "QA" |
| 14 |
>> tag at the start of the commit message doesn't give you a pass. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Normally I'd side with you on this...but I'm fairly sure repoman doesn't let |
| 17 |
> you commit packages to the tree missing these headers. This leads me to |
| 18 |
> believe you didn't use repoman, or ignored it? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
feel free to grab the code i originally committed and run `repoman |
| 21 |
full` yourself. no fatal errors. in fact you can see the generated |
| 22 |
tags in my commit message. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
even then, deleting an ebuild purely due to different copyright is |
| 25 |
complete bs. anyone who understands copyright knows the situation in |
| 26 |
Gentoo is completely unenforceable. we have no CLA. this was |
| 27 |
patrick/QA wasting people's time to check a meaningless box. |
| 28 |
-mike |
Archives