2010/1/27 Xavier Chantry <chantry.xavier@gmail.com>:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 15:45 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Just to make it clear:
There is not a single claim from a lawyer that confirms the claims from the hostile downstram packager.
Looking through the thread on the fedora list they claim there's lawyers confirmed it, but in the same thread you say they're not lawyers.
Point is, the situation is unclear and all that is done is flaming. People flame you for your weird license, you flame other people for forking your software.
Mr Schilling reminds me quite a bit of that Ion guy who was overly hostile and trollish. That clears up the situation just fine for me.
Well I thought about that too, and I believe there is one huge difference : tuomov explicitly imposed a lot of restrictions in packaging, and apparently didn't want or didn't care at all if Arch packaged it or not. If it is packaged, it has to be under his terms. If it isn't, who cares. His interest seemed to not have it packaged, as he believes that would mean less problems and less bug reports for him.
Sorry about the dumb question, but can you post a link for the tuomov restrictions? This is about cdrtools or cdrkit?
Joerg on the other hand seems to care a lot about the inclusion of his software in the official Arch repository. Actually, I really wonder like pyther : "What is in this for him?". The software is already in AUR, which every Arch users know and use. According to him, wodim is completely broken, so surely the majority of Arch users either notice it themselves or are told by other people, and will switch to AUR cdrecord.
This is about mainstream maintaining. Why the buggy software is actively maintained, precompiled with binaries for i686 and x86_64, and the good software is tagged as "unmaintained"?
Even if that's not the case (2 possibilities : wodim is not as broken as Joerg pretends, or arch users are clueless), is Arch really noticeable compared to the big distrib ?
Well, Archlinux is a good distro with a very active crew, and it is a growing distro indeed. And now the maintainer of a big and famous piece of software is actively endorsing your software in that list! I think Archlinux is a noticeable distro indeed.
I am curious to know if anyone has pointers to estimates of linux distribution userbase, but I doubt Arch would matter.
And seriously, if the goal is world domination, making Debian/Ubuntu an enemy is a very efficient way for failing.