Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (798 mails)

[Joerg.Schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Joerg Schilling)]

Karsten König <remur@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Am Dienstag, 1. Februar 2011, 17:43:40 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> > Marcus Meissner <meissner@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > No, but any Base:System maintainer could potentially.
> > >
> > > As we are not "allowed" by Joerg to patch cdrecord to the way Linux does
> > > things like device handling and permissions, I see it not fit for the
> > > openSUSE distribution however.
>
> Oh, I didn't knew this, CDDL beeing an OSI approved licence this sounds wierd 
> to me.

it is a wierd claim.....

> > Looks you are missinformed with respect to more than one issue.
> >
> > 1) there is no need to modify the code as it already correctly honors linux
> >     device handling and permissions
> >
> > 2) if you believe that there is a problem, contact me in order to avoid to
> >     introduce a bug. If your really report a problem, this would of course
> >     be immediately fixed in the original.
> >
> > One of the major problem of the Debian fork is that the people who
> > initiated it miss basic skills in Linux knowledge and thus introduced many
> > bugs in device handling.
>
> This sounds similar to the way Mozilla tries handling downstream patching, 
> they enforce this stance over their copyright though, what in the CDDL makes 
> it impossible to ship downstream patched binaries? I guess they would have to 
> be licenced under the CDDL as well, beside that why is it forbidden?

Naming is not part of software licening.
If you like to call the beast cdrtools,cdrecord,..... you need to ensure that 
the quality of what you deliver is worth giving the official name for it.

> And why shouldn't we be allowed to introduce bugs? This sounds opposite of 
> what free software is about. If this is a copyright issue this could be 
> handled similar to debian iceweasel, just fork off every release, change the 
> name and other strings on which you own the copyright and apply our patches.
>
> The plan is of course not to introduce any bugs ;-)

You may not be informed about the history of Linux distros and their way of 
dealing with aparent problems. Many Linux distros unfortunately do not go the 
way that is obvious for OSS but rather introduce bugs. 

In previous times, I did not need to restrict the use of the original names, 
but starting from around 2004, there have been several Linux distros that 
intentionally introduced bugs into my software resulting in an extremely high 
amount of support mail for me.

Suse has been one of those Linux distros, that introduced bugs. 

BTW: no other OS but Linux did cause similar problems......

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                (uni)  
       joerg.schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (work) Blog: 
http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx