Wodim trouble

[King InuYasha]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Joerg Schilling <
Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> 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 revive
> >upstream, or else host a development tree on fh if upstream stays idle.
>
> Note that is is just the other way:
>
> 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?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20091102/57057bfc/attachment.htm>