Installshield 6 (inter-proc) patches

[Geoff Thorpe]

On Wednesday 19 December 2001 00:34, Roger Fujii wrote:
> Geoff Thorpe wrote:
> > However, if I might wax extreme for a moment, my out-there suggestion
> > would be to stick with a BSD style license but to put an advertising
> > clause *in*.
>
> The problem with this is that it would make it incompatible with *GPLed
> components as an ad clause conflicts with an Open Source definition.

Which is why I made the suggestion of dual-licensing with GPL.

> But most apps wine will run *cannot* use a GPLed component.  GPL
> expressly forbids being linked to a nonGPLed component.  *GPL does not
> only cover the source, but rather the USE of the components as well. 
> Read the
> license.  It's quite an eye opener.

I'd argue (though IANAL) that a nonGPLed win32 executable running under 
wine is not being "linked" to any GPL component - wine itself may be 
linking to its own GPL components at run-time depending on what's going on 
with the win32 executable. But in terms of true linkage, I'd have viewed 
the win32 executable as more like a document that causes the host 
application (wine) to load appropriate sub-components with which to process 
the document. MS Word (to use an example) might have to dynamically link in 
a special MS Word component to process specifics in my document, it doesn't 
mean my document is "linked" with the MS Word component does it?

Of course, we could all ask RMS his opinion but we all know he'll interpret 
it (once again) to mean whatever is required to spread his GPL tenderhooks 
as far as possible. Living in Wellington, NZ I'm having to fight back hard 
the temptation to make a "Sauron" joke here ... :-)

Cheers,
Geoff