Commercial support

[Tom Wickline]

On 5/7/05, Shachar Shemesh <wine-devel at shemesh.biz> wrote:

> >
> This is actually a very good point in favor of not charging money at
> all. If you charge money, you create obligation. That's the way the
> legal system works. If you do not, you can easily delist any known LGPL
> offender.

It could be looked at as a minimum donation request, and any funds
raised should go to the WPF.

> 
> If that doesn't convince you, then try this for size. If we do charge
> 10K/yr, Lingnu will not be listed there. It's simply not worth it for
> me. If ANYONE is going to be listed there, then, it will be some huge
> company, with very little actual Wine involvement. Being as it is that
> Wine would like the commercial vendors listed too, I think that's a
> lose-lose. Don't you? 

I believe giving away the only resource that winehq.org has for
generating revenue for the WPF is insane. The way it is now we have a
pay-pal account for donations and this is the only way any funds make
it into this account. I think we should explore ways to raise money
for future Wineconf's and other worth while expenditures. While 10k/yr
may be a high target 100/yr is a bare minimum at best.

Or do you really think that Lingnu is going to
> hold back code from Wine?

No I don't, I never have and as as Ive already said before I believe
everyone in this discussion is responsible and supporters of OSS.

About what will happen if a rouge company shows up?
I for see winehq.org setting up a page like PearPC and asking the
community for help. But some people here think we should have trust
and faith in people and not be pessimistic like myself.

http://starport.dnsalias.net/index.php?show=article&id=352

And on the out come of this discussion, read the entirety of this
thread and apply "bays theorem" and a result will soon follow.

http://psych.rice.edu/online_stat/chapter5/probability.html

Cheers,

Tom