Jeremy makes a persuasive argument for LGPL

[Sylvain Petreolle]

At this time, I'm not a developer since i released
no code for the moment, but I'm a contributor
in the sense I made some bug reports.

But if I will release some code, this will be under a 
xGPL license. If there are forks, that's a good point,
but only if the developer makes reference to the
original code.

Time of reinventing the wheel in every program is over
! xGPL is here !

 --- dschwarz at bellatlantic.net a écrit : > 
> Well, I'm fairly convinced after reading his
> argument that LGPL is the
> right way to go. I think it's better for the Wine
> project over the long
> term.
> 
> For those companies who have built a business model
> on closed source
> enhancements to Wine, there is still a way to play
> the game:
> 
> At some point Wine is going to improve to the point
> where the core code
> works well enough to do almost everything we need.
> There will always be
> room for improvement, but the action may shift to
> reimplementing Microsoft
> applications that have important APIs (Internet
> Explorer, Windows Media
> Player...).
> 
> I'm sure that Microsoft will change its EULAs to
> prohibit use of
> applications such as MSIE on a Non-Microsoft OS. It
> has already started
> doing this for some programs.
> 
> Companies could respond by selling open or closed
> source reimplementations
> of these applications, bundled with a LGPL Wine.
> There will always be
> plenty of ways to add value on top of the core Wine
> code.
> 
> Meanwhile, LGPL ensures that core code improvements
> will flow back to
> benefit all, not just those individuals and
> companies that have an
> altruistic bent.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Daniel Schwarz
> dschwarz at bellatlantic.net
> http://www.winecentric.com
> http://winecentric.com/wiki
> 
> 
>  

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.fr