On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>That may be true, but since cdrecord is not shippable, it's a pretty
>vacuous truth. The solution is obviously to fix the bug and help reviveNote that is is just the other way:
>upstream, or else host a development tree on fh if upstream stays idle.
It is cdrkit that is undistributable as it is cdrkit that in conflict with
the Copyright law and the GPL.
Cdrtools has been checked for legal problems by several lawyers including
the Sun legal department and none could find any legal problem.
Cdrkit was created by a hostile downstream, see:
http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html
and nobody so far was able to prove the claims about so called license
problems spread by Eduard Bloch by using quotes from the GPL text.
The problem with the existence is a social problem and we, the people
in the OSS community need to fid a way to deal with this social problem.
P.S.:
Libburn is no alternative too: it misses most important features it is
non-prtable and we recently learned that the Authors of libburn do not
care much about where they take the software from. Note that they claimed not
to use any bit from the original cdrtools project's source but they really did
use code from cdrtools. I would call this a social problem....
Jörg
What is going on here? I thought Fedora only shipped upstream code? What's all this business about having broken forks and licensing issues?
The only thing I can figure out from this conversation is that the CDDL is supposed to be incompatible with the GPL. If that's the case, why not simply ask the original creator to kindly dual license it?
The only thing I can figure out from this conversation is that the CDDL is supposed to be incompatible with the GPL. If that's the case, why not simply ask the original creator to kindly dual license it?
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
