Clarification on my call for license change
ps at leissner.se
Fri Feb 15 09:19:07 CST 2002
> On Fri, 2002-02-15 at 09:49, Roland wrote:
> > At 08:19 AM 2/15/02 -0600, Jeremy White wrote:
> > >Several people have asked me to clarify my original post.
> > I just don't understand one thing:
> > How does your company expect to make money once WINE is
> xGPLed? If all your
> > code has to be contributed back, why should I buy it from
> your company?
> Well, for one, we have a proprietary product that links to
> Wine; we would continue to sell that.
> For another, we would continue to sell services to organizations
> who wish to use Wine, but can't because it isn't complete enough.
> And finally, we would sell services to organizations that need
> to depend on Wine, but cannot do so without the assurance of
> qualified support to back up that dependence.
So you have answered the first question.
CodeWeavers might survive.
Good for you.
But the second more important question was (in my words):
Why should I buy a Wine distribution from you?
If you are forced to contribute back everything I can just do:
cvs update ; ./configure ; make install
What I and other have been trying to say is that some business
models like consulting business makes sense with a LGPL:ed Wine
but others like Transgaming:s might not. Read what Gavriel wrote
in his first(?) reply again.
More information about the wine-devel