It's the exact same issue. Author ships code with a permissive license, other people build code, and view things from a purely legal perspective. Author reali

It's the exact same issue. Author ships code with a permissive license, other people build code, and view things from a purely legal perspective. Author realizes that code doesn't exist in a vacuum, and that actual binaries/packages matter (different versions, etc) , which he doesn't control, and it's a problem to him. He then asks the distro guys to do things differently. Distro guys are either offended (evil author!) , legalists (he chose the wrong license, his fault) or sometimes helpful (maybe there's an alternative) . I think it's obvious the authors made a licensing mistake, and I don't understand why distro maintainers don't want to see this. All in all, it's quite fascinating : a bit of law, a bit of social contract, and something truly in the 'grey area' where we, humans , don't always shine.