On 01/27/2010 11:18 AM, kludge wrote:
On 01/27/2010 09:49 AM, Heiko Baums wrote:
Am Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:17:01 -0500
schrieb pyther<pyther@xxxxxxxxxx>:
Look at the high-profile case of cdrtools vs cdrkit, though; it is
huge. You stated that sun spent 3 months looking into it. If for some
odd reason someone decide to sue the arch project there is a big risk
for Aaron and the maintainer of the package. At the very least they
would likely have to consult a lawyer and possibly show up in court.
This becomes a big time commitment and financial burden as the
donations from this project are fairly minimal (at least compared to
the hiring of a lawyer).
Lets face it, everyone on this project is unpaid and has a real life.
It seems as if a few of the main devs have decided they don't want to
take the "risk."
I doubt that someone will go directly to court. If someone sees
licensing issues he most likely will first ask the Arch devs to remove
cdrtools from the repos. If this will be the case, they can just remove
it and revert to cdrkit. This won't cost anything.
If there really was such a legal issue I bet no other distribution
would have cdrtools in its repos or many other distributions would have
been sued already. So why should Arch Linux after many years the first
distro to be sued?
And as I've already written I can't find the CDDL in the cdrtools
source package. I can only find the GPLv2. So cdrecord and mkisofs are
both licensed under the GPLv2.
Greetings,
Heiko
here's a proposal for the future of this discussion:
1) Joerg is no longer allowed to participate in the the discourse unless
directly questioned.
2) Allan: ditto.
3) All other participants work toward creating a formal proposal and
then debating and resolving reservations about that proposal, each in turn.
4) Aaron, as overlord, set a sunset clause on the discussion period, act
as moderator (or delegate if he's sick of this shit), and maintain final
approval/veto over the proposal that emerges.
Anyone?
-kludge
I disagree.
Allan should be able to participate because he is a core developer.
However, I think this needs to go to arch-dev-public or maybe better yet
arch-dev-private (if this issue isn't already there).
From that point the developers can talk among themselves what they want
to do as it is their project. Then if they choice they can let use know
the results.
This isn't a democracy, it is a dictatorship. Luckily the dictators are
nice and listen to the community every now and then.
~pyther
