On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> wrote: > So, RESTRICT="mirror" would turn into > RESTRICT="officially-dont-mirror-but-actually-do-just-in-case-distfiles-are-dropped-upstream-but-after-we-still-cant-officially-mirror-them-due-to-license-and-copyright-infringement-anyway" > ? > > Pretty sure, no matter what, we aren't going to be allowed to host > these distfiles, even if the upstream host disappears, even if the > company goes under. If we can't get permission to officially mirror > the files then the company is active and alive, i don't see how it's > likely to get permission after the distfiles/server/company goes away.
Either you're trying very hard to not get it or you haven't read my previous email carefully enough. Let me try and be clearer. The packages I'm concerned with have had their distfiles backed up. We're not yet in that situation but the day the publisher stops distributing these distfiles, I'll be ready to send the right email to the (hopefully) right person and hope for the best. I was suggesting we did that more often. And with that I'll stop here, because these childish arguments are not worth any more of my time. Denis.
