Should Wine move to LGPL 3?

Kai Blin kai.blin at gmail.com
Fri Jul 13 17:29:15 CDT 2007


On Friday 13 July 2007 18:23:32 Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Ian Macfarlane wrote:
>   > - Samba has decided to become GPL3+ only, as they want the added
> >
> > protections provided by the license. WINE and Samba seem like projects
> > that may potentially wish to share code (a very quick search brings up
> > articles like this http://www.winehq.org/?issue=272), and if WINE
> > sticks to supporting GPLv2+ rather than GPLv3+, then WINE will no
> > longer be able to integrate Samba code.
>
> This point is actually moot. Samba is GPL and Wine is LGPL. I don't see
> v3 having changed something in regard to that. If Wine wants to use
> Samba code it has to ask the people that own the copyright to relicense
> their work.

Yes, I'm afraid I have to agree here. Samba<->Wine cooperation on the code 
level is hampered by licensing issues anyway.

However, even though this point is not valid, the other points certainly are. 
For what it's worth, switching to the LGPLv3 gets a +1 from me.

Unless someone can come up with a scenario where the LGPLv3 would actually be 
harmful, let's switch.

Cheers,
Kai
-- 
Kai Blin
WorldForge developer  http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer        http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member     http://www.samba.org/samba/team/
--
Will code for cotton.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20070714/a6d02fab/attachment.pgp


More information about the wine-devel mailing list