Re: k3b & brasero don't work, nerolinux does- works ar 2X
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>Joerg doesn't like wodim, because he doesn't really believe people should be
>able to fork his code. (He is the primary developer of cdrecord.) His
This is wrong. The problem with wodim is that it is not a real fork.
A fork is something that is supported, but wodim is unsupported.
This pseudo fork has been initiated by a person that soon stopped working on
the "fork" and then started to advertize for Nerolinux. Please explain
me the background for this kind of habbit!
>assertion that wodim violates the GPL and Germany's "Author's Rights" (I
>can't spell the original German word.) does not appear to be supported by
>precident or even trained legal analysis of the specifics. I don't think
>wodim can be reasonably held to hurt Joerg's reputation or integrity.
Wodim is in conflict with both GPL and Urheberrecht (*).
*) http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/urhg/index.html
Wodim (cdrkit) cannot be legally distributed
>Providing symlinks from the old binary names to the new ones, and giving
>similar output are, in fact, required for interoperability.
The problem is that many people still believe that they have a real cdrecord
when they call "cdrecord" and this is not true.
These people then are confused when features that have been introduced three
years ago are missing in their (expected to be recent) "version" of cdrecord.
>That said, wodim was forked from a "really old" version of cdrecord (the last
>version that was clearly licensed under the GPL). Of course, browsing
>Joerg's site shows you that cdrecord hasn't had a stable release in 4.5 years
>and wodim had a stable release 2 months ago.
Cdrtools (the original) had 55 releases in the last 100 months. Wodim had
7 releases in the same period of time and there are still more bug inside
than the source they are based on.
>Wodim certainly had and has it's share of issues, but so has cdrecord. If
This is a funny claim. Please tell me about a single problem with cdrecord.
>either (a) you don't intend to distribute cdrecord OR (b) you agree with
>Joerg's interpretation of the GPL, I strongly encourage you to install
>cdrecord from Joerg's site. If it works and wodim doesn't, there's clearly a
>bug in wodim, and you should file one. IMO, Joerg interpretation is
>incorrect as he assumes "source code" (which is a defined phrase in the GPL)
>means something other than what it is defined to mean.
I am not sure about your intention here. If you care about legallity, you cannot
use wodim, so what is your point?
But if you are talking about bugs, guess from where I know about the long list
of bugs in wodim? I did just read the bugtracking systems of the Linux
distributors that publish wodim. There are dozens of bugs that are documented
since more than two years and there is little hope that they will ever be fixed.
On the other side, the typical time to fix a bug in the original software is
1-2 weeks. For the same reason, there are no known issued with the original
software.
>IANADD, but I read the archives:
>debian-legal also doesn't agree with Joerg's interpretation of the GPL and
>is "in the business" of distributing software. They feel that distributing
>binaries of cdrecord produced from the source after the fork is not allowed
>by copyright law, and would expose Debian to legal action. However, they
>would like to continue providing cdburning software to Debian users. Since
>Debian could not convince Joerg to change the licensing to something they
>felt they could distribute, they had to begin a project to make cdburning
>software, which brought us wodim.
Debian legal is a discussion board of laymen, I gave up having a useful
discussion with them. On the other side, Debian introduced problems with
GPL and Urheberrecht in the fork so wodim/cdrkit cannot be legally distributed
(see above).
>Personally, I use wodim and will continue to use it, because I don't doubt
>it's status as free software. I have some doubt that cdrecord is free
>software; I don't doubt Joerg intends it to be free software, but I think his
>particular love of the CDDL causes problems.
The original software is of course free software. It seems that you are in doubt
because you listen to the wrong people ;-)
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Reply to: