Installshield 6 (inter-proc) patches

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

I've initially wanted to reply to one of the messages in the thread, but I
realized that we're going in circles.

Let's recap, and look at the spirit (i.e. the intent) of the two licenses
in question:
 1. BSD  = here is the code, you can do whatever you want with it.
 2. LGPL = here is the code, use it however you want, but if you make
           modifications to it, contribute it back.

Technicalities aside, the LGPL spirit seems to be accepted by most
people. We've heard no end of discussion of what represents the code, and
so on, but in reality (please Patrik :)), Wine is a _well_defined_ piece
of software. In fact, it's defined by Microsoft, and well accepted by the
world at large.

Now, that being said, there seems to be two camps:
 -- the BSD camp, which maintains that BSD is good enough, and that
people will in fact do what the LGPL wants.
 -- the LGPL camp, which says 'well, if that's the case, why not have it
formalized in the license'?

The only reason that seems to be invoked by the BSD camp, is that the BSD
license works in practice just like the LGPL, but moreover, it is somehow
friendlier towards the commercial folks.

Before I go any further, I would like to stress a very important
point: Wine is in fact a collection of independent projects. These are the
DLLs, and they nicely (and unequivocally) partition Wine into lovely
little, independent components. And this means that the LGPL is
independently contained to each and every DLL. It is the _perfect_
position to be LGPLed.

At this point, I would like to know if people agree up to this point. The
discussion has been going all over the place, so I would like to keep this
email short and to the point:
  0. Isn't Wine's best interest to evolve and develop as fast as it can?
  1. If so, isn't the LGPL _spirit_ in Wine's best interest?
  2. If so, why shouldn't we formalize it in the license?

When answering these questions, let's try to leave the commercial aspect
out of it for a second. That is a separate discussion. You see, the reason
we care about the commercial aspect is that we hope (from Wine's selfish
point of view -- as it should be!), that the commercial world will
actually _help_ in the development of Wine (that is, having a commercial
universe around Wine would be in Wine's best interest). Now, I claim that
the LGPL is _way_better_ for the commercial interests in the long term,
but I will leave that to a future email (if people care to discuss it).

All I have to say is that for me, the conclusion is unescapable: we should
switch to LGPL.

--
Dimi.