Should we get rid of the wine-license list?
wine at troy.rollo.name
Mon Jan 3 15:07:56 CST 2005
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:49, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 08:35:26PM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> > Looking at the archives it appears that wine-license has had very little
> > traffic, to the point where a lot of it is probably not being read when
> > it comes up, since people like me are not subscribed to that list.
> Yeah, I think it we should get rid of it. It was a dead list from
> the very beginning, and it hasn't seen any significant traffic in
> a long while. Besides, licensing discussions are rather pointless
> now, we can't change from LGPL.
The perils of taking a holiday (it's not my fault - I was *made* to take a
The wine-license list still has one useful purpose. Note the description of
the list on the web site:
Closed list that was for discussing legal issues related to
Wine, including license issues. (Closed 2004-12-16)
By having this discussion on a separate list, those of us who have legal
training are more likely to notice and respond to legal issues raised by
others. If they're buried in the other list, it is much more likely that
these things would be missed.
I'm not sure how many lawyers we have, but I'd guess it's not enough that a
legal issue buried in wine-devel is guaranteed to get the attention of one of
More information about the wine-devel