On Fri, May 21, 2021, 4:36 PM mar77i via aur-general < aur-general@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> -‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Friday, May 21, 2021 10:25 PM, Manhong Dai 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 > 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-distributions-that-support-them/7125 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. >
