Bug 216333

Approved by AJ.

*** Bug 217239 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

I'm going to add the following snippettino:

  <!-- bug 216333 -->
  <sect3 id="cdrecord" status="2006-11-02">
   <title>cdrecord Part of the New wodim Package </title>
   <para>
The command line tool "cdrecord" is part of the new "wodim" package.
</para>
  </sect3>

Two additional comments:

1/ I think you will find it you also search through the descriptions (or the file lists).

2/ We install wodim (and thus cdrecord) by default.  I'd say this is not a major issue.

I'll submit a new RN package tomorrow.

Maybe the text should emphasize that wodim can be "used instead of cdrecord" instead of "is cdrecord".

The "...is..." expression is problematic because wodim is _not_ cdrecord; it provides the functionality of cdrecord without being cdrecord.

(The difference is important because of "damage of reputation" and "potential defamation" claims in the past.)

Thanks for feedback.  Maybe, this follwoing version is better (the half of the second sentence follows the wodim man-page):

  <!-- bug 216333 -->
  <sect3 id="cdrecord" status="2006-11-02">
   <title>cdrecord Shipped with the New wodim Package</title>
   <para>
The command line tool "cdrecord" is now shipped together with "wodim" package.
"wodim" itself offers the functionality of recording data or audio Compact
Discs on an Orange Book CD recorder or writing DVD media on a DVD recorder.
</para>
  </sect3>

The man page of wodim says: Do not refer to this application as "cdrecord".

I propose the following text:



New wodim package to write optical disk media

The "cdrecord" package has been dropped from the distribution. The new "wodim" package can be used to record data or audio Compact Discs on an Orange Book CD-Recorder or to write DVD media on a DVD-Recorder.



(The text should emphasize that cdrecord -> wodim is really a switch to a different project which doesn't claim to be cdrecord and not just a packaging change. The user gets informed that he switches to a different tool.)

I'm all for it--but that's completely different from what was asked and agreed in the beginning ;)  So Christoph or Andreas, please check this request again.

I'm also wondering why we ship cdreaord at all and install it by default (that's even worse and somehow defeats what has to be accomplised).

Karl, I'm ok with the latests wording. 

We don't ship cdrecord:
lrwxrwxrwx    1 root    root  5 Okt 31 07:06 /usr/bin/cdrecord -> wodim

Now it makes sense to me :)

  <sect3 id="wodim" status="2006-11-02">
   <title>New wodim Package to Write Optical Disk Media (CD-ROM/DVD)</title>
   <para>
The "cdrecord" package has been dropped from the distribution. The new "wodim"
package can be used to record data or audio Compact Discs on an Orange Book
CD recorder or to write DVD media on a DVD recorder.
</para>
  </sect3>

-> /work

Please note that wodim is full of bugs and cannot be legally
distributed. Wodim thus is not a replacement for the original
software. It would be nice if SuSe did add a note where users
may obtain binary packages for the original software, Suse
offers the original software.

Jörg, please "Reopen" a bug, if there are issues.  I'm doing this right now.

Jürgen, please check what needs to be done.

Yes, we'll definitly announce the added packages in release-notes when it is time to do so. This is a task for the product managers, not for Karl.

Karl, is the language quoted in comment#9 still the current language?

If so, I suggest to rephrase it to a neutral form, no longer qualifying one as new and the other as old. Maybe something along these lines would work: "OpenSUSE Project builds two cdrtools packages, they are called 'cdrecord' and 'wodim'. If one of the packages is not included in a specific product media, please check the download areas."

there is still an open question...

(In reply to comment #14)
> Karl, is the language quoted in comment#9 still the current language?

10.2 is probably still affected, but thatś unmaintained by now and we can no longer fix it.

> If so, I suggest to rephrase it to a neutral form, no longer qualifying one as
> new and the other as old. Maybe something along these lines would work:
> "OpenSUSE Project builds two cdrtools packages, they are called 'cdrecord' and
> 'wodim'. If one of the packages is not included in a specific product media,
> please check the download areas."

In the 11.2 release notes we no longer mention CD writing software, neither wodim nor cdrecord.  Thus nothing to fix.

If we should add something to the forthcoming 11.3 release notes, please open a new report.

(In reply to comment #14)
> Karl, is the language quoted in comment#9 still the current language?
> 
> If so, I suggest to rephrase it to a neutral form, no longer qualifying one as
> new and the other as old. Maybe something along these lines would work:
> "OpenSUSE Project builds two cdrtools packages, they are called 'cdrecord' and
> 'wodim'. If one of the packages is not included in a specific product media,
> please check the download areas."

Sorry but the phrase "OpenSUSE Project builds two cdrtools packages"
is biased and thus not permitted.

While you have the permission to write something like "wodim is a defective
fork created from an outdated version of cdrtools", because this is a 
descriptive use of the word "cdrtools", you are not allowed to use your
proposal as this would cause the impression that there are two equal
versions of cdrtools which is definitely not the case.

BTW: you should mention cdrecord in the release notes as the fork "cdrkit"
is full of bugs and as many people have serioous problems if they use the
fork instead of the original software.

we are not discussing permissions here.