Oh wow I didn't know about this. I never contributed code, but hacked around some wayland issues when it caused crashes. I find the behavior baffling to be honest. On one hand ManuelSchneid3r claims to not be a lawyer, on the other hand he dismisses comments about included code and linking in GPL plugins as not relevant and not being copyrightable (well you have to be a judge really to determine that). Then he says he doesn't want to have to spend time on discussing licensing, but then creates this whole storm in a teacup by changing the license and then says even even wants to write his own license. Then he says his comments (in a now deleted issue even) that you can package for distros are sufficiently binding, but on the other hand claims that his note on the website that Albert is GPL did not mean the code was GPL because there was no license file in the repository.
I think it would be good for him to sit down and sort out what are the goals that he would like to achieve. At the moment his behavior is clearly counterproductive.
His main worry seems to be redistribution with changes, because somebody might do something malicious. But realistically what are the chances, and
I think it would be good for him to sit down and sort out what are the goals that he would like to achieve. At the moment his behavior is clearly counterproductive.
His main worry seems to be redistribution with changes, because somebody might do something malicious. But realistically what are the chances, and