Wine license issues

[Mark Hannessen]

>>by the way...
>>what do you mean with rewind being the "official" wine.
>>ain't the LGPL licensed wine the official one now ?

> Sorry,

> I meant:
> It wouldn't be necessary to keep ReWind, if the "official" (LGPL) wine
> already let their dlls and dll enhancements to have a different
> license (as they state).

not true

if anyone would want to alter the wine core, for any reason
he has the right to use the "rewind core". 
( for example: to create or a not open-source commercial product )
so if someone has the right to do something, he should also
be able to do it, so rewind needs to be availible somewhere.

like i already mentioned before,
rewind is also used for something you might call "patch trading"

wineX can not use Patches that are LGPL licened in there
AFPL dll's, so people who think wineX is doing a good job
submit patches to both wine and rewind ( dual license )

wineX then picks these patches out of rewind and uses them.

Mark Hannessen