Clarification on my call for license change
David Elliott
dfe at tgwbd.org
Sun Feb 17 13:37:13 CST 2002
On 2002.02.17 02:50 Sean Farley wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 12:06, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Marcus Meissner wrote:
> >
> > > And especially:
> > >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&selm=1szq0fy8sm.fsf_-_%40lrcsuns.epfl.ch
> >
> > OK,
> >
> > What about this:
> >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ingo+Molnar+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine&hl=en&selm=67ue48%24ajm%241%40palladium.transmeta.com&rnum=3
>
> Linus's quote was quite interesting:
>
> I don't personally contribute - partly because of the same worries
> that Ingo Molnar brought up some time ago, ie the copyright. It's
> not that I dislike the wine copyright - I actually think that the
> BSD-style copyrights can be a good thing. But _personally_ I don't
> want to do significant work under that kind of copyright and having
> to wonder whether the best version of Wine will be free in the
> future..
>
> That was almost the same as Brett's message concerning working on Wine
> if it was xGPL'd.
>
Almost, but not quite. Brett's quote seemed more like he was trying to
hold it over our heads like "See, I won't contribute if you go LGPL and
you'll lose all the wondeful commercial developers like me!". Linus's
quote was more like "I won't contribute if you're not under a copyleft,
but I have no vote so take that as nothing more than my opinion". Then it
was left at that, there was no ongoing argument for a week about it.
Linus was certainly more tactful.
In other words, I took Brett's attitude as being hostile towards the
project from the beginning but when I read Linus's comments there was no
hostility involved. Maybe it is just that Linus is a better writer.
> > or this:
> >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ingo+Molnar+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine&hl=en&selm=349af265.0%40news.ic.sunysb.edu&rnum=9
>
> This made me wonder about what happened to TWIN. I noticed they faded
> away. If anyone thinks xGPL'ing WINE will bring more support, they
> should look at TWIN. I am not saying the license killed it, but I am
> saying that the LGPL did not bring it any support.
>
I am about 99% sure that TWIN was released under LGPL after Willows had no
interest in it whatsoever. Back in the day Codeweavers did a lot of
projects by combining Twin and WINE into "Twine" and using that to do
ports. So Jeremy is certainly no stranger to using an LGPLd Wine-like
project for his business.
-Dave
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list