Should Wine move to LGPL 3?
kai.blin at gmail.com
Fri Jul 13 17:29:15 CDT 2007
On Friday 13 July 2007 18:23:32 Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Ian Macfarlane wrote:
> > - Samba has decided to become GPL3+ only, as they want the added
> > protections provided by the license. WINE and Samba seem like projects
> > that may potentially wish to share code (a very quick search brings up
> > articles like this http://www.winehq.org/?issue=272), and if WINE
> > sticks to supporting GPLv2+ rather than GPLv3+, then WINE will no
> > longer be able to integrate Samba code.
> This point is actually moot. Samba is GPL and Wine is LGPL. I don't see
> v3 having changed something in regard to that. If Wine wants to use
> Samba code it has to ask the people that own the copyright to relicense
> their work.
Yes, I'm afraid I have to agree here. Samba<->Wine cooperation on the code
level is hampered by licensing issues anyway.
However, even though this point is not valid, the other points certainly are.
For what it's worth, switching to the LGPLv3 gets a +1 from me.
Unless someone can come up with a scenario where the LGPLv3 would actually be
harmful, let's switch.
WorldForge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/
Will code for cotton.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20070714/a6d02fab/attachment.pgp
More information about the wine-devel