| 1 |
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:37:12 +0200 |
| 2 |
Joerg.Schilling@××××××××××××××××.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > So, mkisofs.c is the "Program" and cdrtools is a "work based on the |
| 8 |
> > Program", right? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> If you believe this and what you claimed later, then the GPL would be |
| 11 |
> a definitely non-free license. See the OpenSource definition at |
| 12 |
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
No, I don't believe in anything. I'm just trying to provoke you to |
| 15 |
finally explain those things here. You see, I'm such kind of person, |
| 16 |
who even doesn't need you to show any reference to public sources where |
| 17 |
the attacks against you could be seen. I would understand and accept |
| 18 |
your position even if you had only explained it and answered |
| 19 |
the questions it arises. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Unfortunately you don't do that. You don't say "There is no problem in |
| 22 |
mixing GPL and CDDL in cdrtools because...", the only thing I saw you |
| 23 |
saying was "If there is problem with cdrtools, the fork has the same |
| 24 |
problem and another 10000 other problems" |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Well, I don't give a damn if the fork has any problems, I don't use it, |
| 27 |
I use your package, cdrtools. So, I'm interested only and only in the |
| 28 |
cdrtools case. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Yes, the questions that I'm arising were originally asked by the people |
| 31 |
you say attacked you, I don't try to hide that. The problem is I see |
| 32 |
logic in those questions and unfortunately I never saw you or anyone |
| 33 |
else for that matter explaining why there is no problem to mix CDDL and |
| 34 |
GPL in cdrtools. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
The only thing I saw was something like "I consulted layers and they |
| 37 |
said there was no problem". Well, that's not enough. Quote those |
| 38 |
layers. Ask them to allow you to make their statement public and |
| 39 |
publish it. Do something logical at last for crying out loud! |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> Unfortunately the GPL has not been written in an unambiguous way. |
| 43 |
> This is why the OSI rated the GPL as non-free for several years. Some |
| 44 |
> years ago, the FSF explained that the GPL needs to be interpreted in |
| 45 |
> a way that makes it compliant to the rules at |
| 46 |
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> Jörg |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Alright! GPL is bad! But it out is there, and some parts of cdrtools are |
| 52 |
under that bad license. Like it or not, you have to obey it. So, |
| 53 |
please, explain how one (meaning you) could mix GPL and CDDL w/o |
| 54 |
violating GPL. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
Interpret it for me, please. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
Best regards, |
| 61 |
Daniel |
| 62 |
-- |
| 63 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives