has the LGPL licence fell through ?
Aric.Cyr at gmail.com
Tue Dec 20 22:53:16 CST 2005
Troy Rollo <wine <at> troy.rollo.name> writes:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:24, Tom Wickline wrote:
> > Yes I have read the licence just re read it for that matter...
> > So why no patches from SpecOps?
> It is not a requirement that patches be submitted - only that source code be
> made available. Patches are normally submitted because it is more convenient
> for the developer if the change is in the canonical version. If the developer
> does not see the value of having their patch in the canonical tree, they will
> not (and are not required to) submit it.
> > should Wine move to GPL to keep from
> > being robbed of its code?
> What difference do you expect that to make?
> > If your wondering why I'm ranting :
> > http://news.inq7.net/infotech/index.php?index=1&story_id=60585
> What version of Wine is their stuff based on?
The TurboLinux Japanese page simply says they are licensing David from SpecOps
Labs and that it is partially based on Wine.
Following the link to SpecOpS Labs, I read the fine print at the bottom of this
It sounds like there is hardly an issue here (provided they do as they say)...
move along, nothing to see here. :)
More information about the wine-devel