On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:30:11 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Schilling) wrote:
> Daniel Iliev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You have written the program prog-a.c and published it on your site > > under the GNU GPL. > > > > I have _independently_ written the prog-b.c. > > > > Nex, I've found your program and liked it. I decide that your > > prog-a.c and my prog-b.c serve a common purpose and they complement > > one another. > > > > The question is if I can take your source (prog-a.c) from your > > site, put it into the same directory with my source (prog-b.c), > > make an archive of that directory and distribute the archive under > > CDDL? > > Why do you come up with a claim that is _completely_ unrelated to > cdrtools? Claim!? I was merely asking a question. Completely unrelated!? How about this: mkisofs.c: /* * Program mkisofs.c - generate iso9660 filesystem based upon directory * tree on hard disk. * * Written by Eric Youngdale (1993). * * Copyright 1993 Yggdrasil Computing, Incorporated * Copyright (c) 1999,2000-2007 J. Schilling * * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) * any later version. * So, you have used other people's GPLd work in your cdrtools project and CDDLd your own work in the same project. ... Completely unrelated? LOL > > I am not a lawyer. If you like to get general legal advise, go to a > lawyer! Well, you're not a lawyer, but Novell and RedHat have lawyers and I believe they did not drop cdrtools in favour to cdrkit for technical reasons. After all you are the one convincing people all the time in the technical superiority of cdrtools. > > Do you have any question related to cdrtools? > No, not really. Not any more. -- Best regards, Daniel -- [email protected] mailing list
