zerver wrote:You changed your policy after I asked about the MT stuff, and you lost a bit of my respect by doing so.
We had never needed to deal with un-official engine forks before, or attempts to lock BA derivatives to them. There is nothing unusual about updating rules to deal with new situations.
Also, the policy was not changed after the event; it was set and appeared on the forum months before you released anything. As you know, you asked us months ago if we would allow what you planned and we gave you a clear no.
Your 'hijacked' release is against the branding policy with or without the sentence on dependencies.
Why does BA exist under two different names?
It does not. And there is currently no confusion.
MT needs additional fixes, and there is nothing I can do to prevent that.
Basically all that you've done is renamed function calls with a find-replace search that forces dependency on your engine.
If you actually
need fixes, and if your engine becomes accepted by the devs/moderators, I've got nothing against it; provided they don't cause incompatibilities etc etc.