games-action/koth-0.8.0.ebuild doesn't have a valid ebuild header: # Copyright 1999-2008 Gentoo Foundation and Arcady Genkin <agenkin@thpoon.com> # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 Please fix it. Policy reference: <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=3#doc_chap1_sect2>
No thanks; it's fine.
Ok, you're not going to fix that so it seems we need to take care of it.
I'm unsure we can accept ebuilds with this sort of copyright; can someone from the trustees confirm that it is OK? -A
I care a lot less that 'the header as defined by this arbitrary regex' is wrong and care much more about any legal problems it may cause. The regex is mutable. -A
Earliest accessible version of the ebuild is here: <http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/games-action/koth/koth-0.7.7.ebuild?hideattic=0&revision=1.1&view=markup> Rather short, so it's not sure if this was copyrightable. There should be earlier versions in app-games/koth, but the whole app-games category is missing in CVS history. Looks like somebody has done some "cleanup" of RCS directories. :(
agenkin did become a developer, and I believe this to be a trivial work. If you're really concerned, email him, I'm fairly sure the account still works...
@portage: Can we make the repoman header checks more strict please?
(In reply to comment #7) > @portage: Can we make the repoman header checks more strict please? It turns out that the header check was entirely broken because it was ignoring comment lines. It's fixed in git now: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=2854a67644252fa1133f7f2720b1811b2c3f10fb
(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > @portage: Can we make the repoman header checks more strict please? > > It turns out that the header check was entirely broken because it was ignoring > comment lines. It's fixed in git now: > > http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=2854a67644252fa1133f7f2720b1811b2c3f10fb Thanks! :)
(In reply to comment #3) > I'm unsure we can accept ebuilds with this sort of copyright; can someone from > the trustees confirm that it is OK? Per the Trustees meeting today, copyright headers that deviate from the policy in the developer's handbook are not acceptable in portage, and should never be committed to portage. In this particular case the sense is that the ebuild is trivial enough that we can just modify the headers in the current ebuild. QA can make the necessary changes. The original contributor can be acknowledged in the Changelog as is customarily done. If anybody with a copyright interest in this ebuild raises a strong objection please refer them to the Trustees.
Fixed.
