4 ms·

One of the comments: "As the author of the package that is being re-packaged here. I'm against it being repacked into here. While licensing wise I cannot stop

by reidjs 5y ago

One of the comments: "As the author of the package that is being re-packaged here. I'm against it being repacked into here. While licensing wise I cannot stop you, I do hope you can honor my request. Thank you for considering respecting the author's wishes." It seems more like a matter of respect than a matter of law.

StavrosK 5y ago
The Nix maintainers asked very nicely whether there was a specific reason and whether they could work with the author to solved it. The author just said "no, just don't include my stuff", which he technically didn't have the right to say after releasing the code as FOSS. You can't demand respect from the Nix folks after disrespecting them by telling them to do something "just because".
- Zancarius 5y ago
  Honestly, I think the best solution in this case is to fork his repo from a version still under the MIT license and work with home-automation to replace their dependency.
  - stavros 5y ago
    You don't have to fork, you can just use that release. You just can't use any subsequent releases, but neither can HA.
  - fmajid 5y ago
    He is a HomeAssistant community admin and they took his side, this is a case of two FOSS communities with irreconcilable differences.
    - Zancarius 5y ago
      Interesting! Thanks for the insight! I think you're right. This is largely a difference of opinion. It's a shame it couldn't have worked out better.
    - lucideer 5y ago
      > this is a case of two FOSS communities with irreconcilable differences If the HA community's stance goes on to be made official (for now it's informal forum posts, albeit from senior maintainers), I would argue this is then a case of one FOSS community (Nix) having irreconcilable differences with the community of a proprietary software project falsely advertised as FOSS.
    - lsaferite 5y ago
      More than a community admin, he's an employee apparently.
lucideer 5y ago
If you follow the thread all the way down (and elsewhere, e.g. HA & Fedora communities), you'll see that the author does not seem to truly hold to his own statement that he "cannot stop [them]", and proceeds to attempt to bully them into compliance (despite many efforts by them to come to a compromise that may suit him)

by reidjs 5y ago

StavrosK 5y ago

The Nix maintainers asked very nicely whether there was a specific reason and whether they could work with the author to solved it. The author just said "no, just don't include my stuff", which he technically didn't have the right to say after releasing the code as FOSS. You can't demand respect from the Nix folks after disrespecting them by telling them to do something "just because".

Zancarius 5y ago
Honestly, I think the best solution in this case is to fork his repo from a version still under the MIT license and work with home-automation to replace their dependency.
- stavros 5y ago
  You don't have to fork, you can just use that release. You just can't use any subsequent releases, but neither can HA.
- fmajid 5y ago
  He is a HomeAssistant community admin and they took his side, this is a case of two FOSS communities with irreconcilable differences.
  - Zancarius 5y ago
    Interesting! Thanks for the insight! I think you're right. This is largely a difference of opinion. It's a shame it couldn't have worked out better.
  - lucideer 5y ago
    > this is a case of two FOSS communities with irreconcilable differences If the HA community's stance goes on to be made official (for now it's informal forum posts, albeit from senior maintainers), I would argue this is then a case of one FOSS community (Nix) having irreconcilable differences with the community of a proprietary software project falsely advertised as FOSS.
  - lsaferite 5y ago
    More than a community admin, he's an employee apparently.

lucideer 5y ago

If you follow the thread all the way down (and elsewhere, e.g. HA & Fedora communities), you'll see that the author does not seem to truly hold to his own statement that he "cannot stop [them]", and proceeds to attempt to bully them into compliance (despite many efforts by them to come to a compromise that may suit him)