Installshield 6 (inter-proc) patches

[Alexandre Julliard]

Roger Fujii <rmf at lookhere.com> writes:

> It had very little to do with xfree86 - xfree could continue one the 6.3
> base that they were on.  Look at what the reasoning for the license change was:
>   http://archives.seul.org/seul/leaders/Apr-1998/msg00022.html
> It seems like they were trying to catch the small fry from profiting from
> their work.  Sound familiar?   The problem is that there is no way of 
> doing this without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  

They were trying to prevent commercialisation; this is absolutely not
what the LGPL is about. Actually what they did is very similar to the
Transgaming approach; the code is available but you have to pay if you
want to make money from it. This is *not* what I'm suggesting.

> In the end, if you look at the larger projects (mozilla, openoffice, perl), you will
> see that any of them uses a straight *gpl scheme.  My suggestion is that if you are
> going to change it, change it to something like a currently existing project that
> has commericial involvement (mozilla/openoffice).

I must have missed something here. Both mozilla and openoffice are
basically using LGPL plus another license. Is this what you are
suggesting?  why would that be better than straight LGPL?  and what
would the other license be?

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com