| 1 |
"brullo nulla" <brullonulla@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> The FAQ (I assume you're talking about |
| 4 |
> http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html ) only contain |
| 5 |
> basic information on your side, almost without a single reference that |
| 6 |
> shows me the actual full text of the email exchanges etc. supporting |
| 7 |
> what you say. The FAQ is not in chronological order and it is even |
| 8 |
> self-contradicting in chronological details (e.g. it starts with "In |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
While the attacks from Debian have all been self contradicting, my text is not. |
| 11 |
It seems that you did not read it correctly. Please read it again.... |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> autumn 2005 and early spring 2006, a group of Debian maintainers |
| 14 |
> started to attack the cdrtools project. The attacks have been based on |
| 15 |
> the fact that cdrtools was licensed under the GPL. " then, in the |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The private attacks from Bloch in 2004 have been trolling because of the |
| 18 |
broken UTF-8 support now also fopund in cdrkit. The attacks |
| 19 |
from Debian in Autumn 2005 have been GPL based. Is it so hard to read my |
| 20 |
text? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> final part of the document, you talk about the UTF story: " In fact, |
| 23 |
> this happened around y2004 [...] Now these people have been in trouble |
| 24 |
> and needed an excuse for their behavior." -from this it seems implicit |
| 25 |
> the problems started in 2004). Only explanation you give for all what |
| 26 |
> was happening is a commercial-distributions-are-evil conspiracy theory |
| 27 |
> (which maybe is true, but I am again waiting for evidence -the theory |
| 28 |
> is quite weak, since forking an essential desktop software seems *much |
| 29 |
> worse* than rewriting UTF8 support, and they could have inserted their |
| 30 |
> unofficial patch into their packages even if you refused it upstream, |
| 31 |
> if they felt their UTF8 patch was important). |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
There _is_ an evil conspiracy at least on Suse. Suse told me that they cannot |
| 34 |
use unmodified original software and they need to modify my software. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
If you compare my original software and the modified version from Suse, you will |
| 37 |
find that the unmodified original works out of the box on suse while the suse |
| 38 |
variant does not work at all. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Jörg |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
EMail:joerg@××××××××××××××××××××××××.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin |
| 44 |
js@××××××××××××.de (uni) |
| 45 |
schilling@××××××××××××××××.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ |
| 46 |
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily |
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives