No good CD-Rom copy software (fwd)

[Res]

it all seems like debian packagers right everyone else should STFU anmd 
use hat we gibe you, im sorry i had not realised i joined the secret 
microSlop list, wrong, i tell you what  how about you forward to 
Mark mine and Jorgs emails, and the three of us will discuss the issue
outside the bias of the debian packager, afterall  we only want whats the 
best available and NOT this wanky wodim shit.


On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Oliver Grawert wrote:

> hi,
> On Di, 2009-07-07 at 08:49 +1000, Res wrote:
>> So, Oli, what has Ubuntu got to say about this....., also please CC Jorg
>> directly in Emails reference this issue (as he is not a member of this list).
>
> no idea what "ubuntu has to say" about this and i'm really not
> interested in discussing this beyond this last mail i will send to the
> thread.
>
> note that i only speak on behalf of myself.
> on technical matters in ubuntu the technical board speaks for the
> distro, on community matters of ubuntu the community council speaks, on
> oliver grawerts matters who is a member of this mailing list, a member
> of the ubuntu community and a member of the developers of ubuntu, only
> oliver grawert speaks.
>
> if you read my mails i wrote here before you will see that i didn't
> express any opinion on the topic at all but pointed to former
> discussions, facts and announcements.
>
> ... but to state an opinion:
>
> i trust the technical board of ubuntu, mark specifically could have
> given the review to internal lawyers of canonical and be done with it.
> instead the TB asked an independent third party lawfirm and actually
> invested some time and work into the matter. it was discussed in at
> least three technical board meetings i attended with great desire to
> include it form all participants but due to uncertainy about the license
> issues it was decided to hand it out to someone else and make a decision
> based on the reply.
>
> i don't know joerg but would surely spend him a beer for his great work
> if we would meet. on the other hand while he is a great programmer, he
> seems to be not much of a diplomat which is sad and harms the wide use
> of his software in linux distros.
>
> quoting from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html : ...
> Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL), version 1.0
> This is a free software license. It has a copyleft with a scope that's
> similar to the one in the Mozilla Public License, which makes it
> incompatible with the GNU GPL. This means a module covered by the GPL
> and a module covered by the CDDL cannot legally be linked together. We
> urge you not to use the CDDL for this reason.
>
>
> Also unfortunate in the CDDL is its use of the term “intellectual
> property”.
> ...
> i don't understand how joerg can state the fsf declares his software
> legal while they exactly say it is not in the above statement (cdrecord
> links GPL code against CDDL code) so he accuses the fsf to lie either to
> him or to us ...
>
> apparently eben moglen lies as well (or the technical board does) since
> eben told him in private his software was safe to distribute for a third
> party while he told the opposite to the techboard.
>
> damned, this world is full of liars ...
>
> i personally never had a problem writing CDs in ubuntu but personally
> have interest that ubuntu has all software that is legally distributable
> in the archive. i appreciate that nvidia users can use it because we
> have the freely distributable (though sadly not freely changeable)
> nvidia drivers in the restricted archive. i appreciate that people can
> watch flash content in their browsers and that there is a legal way to
> make i easy for them to install the nonfree flashplayer through an
> installer package. i'm sure the majority of ubuntu developers feels like
> that. if it would be any legally possible for ubuntu to have the
> original cdrecord in the archive even if it would be in multiverse,
> don't you think we would have it ? do you really think the
> ubuntu-burning team would take the effort to provide a PPA with joergs
> software if there wasn't an interest in making it available ?
> ( https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-burning/+archive/ppa )
> i hope they will collect bugs and fixes for that PPA package and that
> joerg accepts the code if those fixes are submitted upstream.
>
> i wish i had never answered to this thread first place but there were so
> many wrong statements that i felt i had to point to the former
> conversations and recent announcements on the topic ...
>
> so that's the personal opinion of mine, not speaking for ubuntu not
> speaking for the technical board, just my personal point of view. if you
> feel like you have to revive the technical board discussion or feel
> something in their decision making process went wrong,
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TechnicalBoardAgenda is the place for you, its a
> wikipage and anyone can add agenda items (though if you add it, please
> make sure to also attend the meeting in which it will be discussed and
> state your opinion and reasons)
>
> ciao
> 	oli
>
> (who is not a debian but a ubuntu developer)
>

-- 
Res

-Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers