I am reminded of jwz, debian, and xscreensaver (Not linking to jwz's blog from HN because... he doesn't want it to be.)
I don't think ... that's how the internet works?
(edit: I mean the "because... he doesn't want it to be" part)
https://www.jwz.org/blog/2021/06/to-be-clear-the-whale-did-n...
edit: maybe jwz took the image down?
$ curl -D - -H 'referer:https://news.ycombinator.com' 'https://www.jwz.org/blog/2021/06/to-be-clear-the-whale-did-not-want-him-in-its-mouth/'
HTTP/1.1 302 Found
...
Location: https://cdn.jwz.org/images/2016/hn.png
1. in this case there's... more to it, as you've been pointed out
2. I still think it's polite to respect someone's wishes, especially when it is trivial to do so.
This attitude of "well I can because I can and what you think doesn't matter" is promoted as the culture of "the internet" by a lot of folks, but it's a cultural thing that not everyone agrees with.
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.