[arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit

[Jan de Groot]

On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 10:29 -0200, Johann Peter Dirichlet wrote:
> Well, there are some lawyer we can just consult to put a thombstone on
> this discussion? It will going to nowhere if we can't do this single
> "clearing" of legal issues. In fact, this is the only hurdle to put
> cdrtools in [community] repo (well, someone needs to adopt it, too).

Seems that won't happen, because:
- this discussion comes up now and then, I've seen exactly the same
discussion on the fedora-legal lists without outcome
- the anti-cdrtools people state that CDDL and GPL are incompatible,
some have lawyers who back that statement
- the pro-cdrtools guy states that the lawyers are wrong, backed by
other statements from other lawyers

So we're in a deadlock here. One says that CDDL+GPL in one package is
illegal, the other states that statement is wrong, but no evidence of
that is given. Without proof that it's legal to distribute a binary with
impossible license combination, I prefer to keep cdrkit in extra until
this has been cleared up with evidence.

As for cdrkit being broken: it burns my cds fine, same for a lot of
other users. People wishing to use cdrecord are free to do so.