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

[Johann Peter Dirichlet]

2010/1/27 Xavier Chantry <chantry.xavier at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Jan de Groot <jan at 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.
>