Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (798 mails)

[Karsten König <remur@xxxxxxx>]

Am Dienstag, 1. Februar 2011, 18:21:44 schrieb 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.

I was under the impression, especially lately that it is mainly avoided to fix 
stuff downstream but to get upstreams help on the issue and make a proper fix 
because supporting the stuff downstream is of course alot harder.

> 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.

Sounds abit paranoid, I don't think any distribution had/has any intentions on 
breaking cdrecord and it's siblings to hurt your name or the brand.

> Suse has been one of those Linux distros, that introduced bugs.
>
> BTW: no other OS but Linux did cause similar problems......

This might be related to the rather large amount of desktop systems with a cd 
burner using linux instead of comparable offerings shipping cdrtools or one of 
it's derivates.


You haven't awnsered how you can prohibit releasing derivate works of the 
current cdrecords suite? Is it only based on copyright so replacing that would 
be enough? That would also mark ourself as the proper bugtarget to avoid 
spamming you with bugreports.


Cheers,
Karsten

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx