TransGaming LGPL clarifications

[Patrik Stridvall]

> > My LGPL concerns are:
> > 
> >  1) We support copy protected CDs in our WineX binary 
> releases.  This support
> 
> This is a valid issue, and I am sure that the Wine community 
> would more
> than happy to provide hooks for you for exactly this purpose. 
> There's no
> other option in this case, so I don't think it' even an issue.

Hooks is not possible because it would violate the paragraph 2d
of the LGPL. At least according to Alexandre's interpretation
of it. Every LGPL:ed function must do what every application
expects even if the application (read: execution enviroment)
doesn't provide the hook function.

Since the hook function in the Transgaming execution enviroment
would cause copy protected games to work, according to
Alexandre's interpretation copy protected games must also work
in the normal Wine execution enviroment that doesn't have the
hook function.

Of course Alexandre's interpretation might be wrong.
However in that case wrapper libraries if definitively
allowed and thus the LGPL is all but meaningless for new
functionallity. Just put a new functionallity in a
proprietary library and add a wrapper that calls it.

In that case almost everything most LGPL proponents
claim is good with the LGPL is gone.

> >  4) Most importantly, the LGPL is a one way road.  
> 
> But that's one of it's features, you know... :) It's what gives people
> piece of mind, 

Peace of mind. Ha ha ha. Allow me to laugh.

Please, you can weld stuck the rudder of ship and claim
that now that the rudder is stuck since we needn't argue
anymore and now we can have peace of mind from the endless
debates on where we should go.

This is not what I would call peace of mind.

> and what I feel creates the level playing 
> field. 

Whether this is true or not is basicly what the
whole debate is about so this is just a unsupported
statement of opinion.

> Just PD,
> and BSD are manyway roads. That is, this is not a valid 
> point. If you want
> to argue that, we're stuck with BSD, period.

Of course it a valid point:
We can always change to LGPL later it will NEVER be to late.

However can you say the same about changing now?

> > That said, I believe that my WineCorp suggestions address 
> both my concerns as well 
> > as the issues raised by the LGPL camp.  
> 
> I personally despise the idea, On practical, and 
> phylosophical grounds.
> And if we go that route, I don't think I'll follow.

For the record:
I'm not particular fond of the idea either,
but mostly for practical reasons. I'm prepared
to talk about it though.