[Wine] Re: Wine license
wineforum-user at winehq.org
Sun Nov 7 01:44:22 CST 2010
Cannot do that much with the loader. Really.you know nothing. Yet you say you know tricks to get out of LGPL. Please if you did you would know the following. So we should believe your goal is to directly sabotage wine.
Lets list what they did with the loader. Number alteration of executable on load. So overriding DRM protections. So programs that don't work with wine libs magically work with trans-gaming version. Due to library redirection and overlaying. Also this magic means they have not altered the wine libs but the application has effectively seen an altered version of the library.
Thank you very much now transgaming can use our loader and give none of there alterations back. We lose. If we change the loader we might as well hand over the libraries. Its that simple . Transgaming already knows every trick to get out of LGPL and the loader gives them a instant out. You are asking for everything. You are trying to claim you are not but you don't know what transgaming has already done using just the loader code.
Heck they currently do this with the old copy MIT of the Wine loader they have of course its not 100 percent compatible any more. We are not going to allow others to have a freeride.
X11 is also another bad example. X11 forked off in 50 different directions no one giving back source code everyone making own versions. So leading to over 15 years of no progress and the main line of X11 bit rotting. Only in recent years has there been any forward motion. What if X is CDDL/EPL/MPL most likely would have progress faster. Something that started X11 current day progressing is Linux due to sections of drivers having to be GPL so limitation on secret. Before Linux XFree86 what Xorg forked from was being forked over and over again into closed source versions on BSD and others offering 3d performance and so on that would die off every few years taking all there features with them. Current day Xorg and Xfree86 are a mix of licenses. Including CDDL EPL MPL GPL LGPL and MIT. When they were pure they made no progress due to closed source forking. These days making a closed source fork of Xorg or Xfree86 you could land mine yourself quite badly due to the mix if licenses.
This is even true of the apache environment. Its not pure either any more. Are items like FreeBSD pure BSD answer no kernel these days contains sections of CDDL and some GPL drivers .
Has the BSD gained developers from what Apple. Answer no Apple turned there kernel into a pure fork it does not share drivers back to its parent. Darwin fork of BSD code base has basically been useless to the general open source world.
Wine has derivatives LGPL has not interfered with the process 1 bit. We have more derivatives now than any time in wine complete history.
Sorry Trans-gaming at the heat of the battle released limited version of there product for free. So free does not mean we will win. Note limited it still supported more applications than wine at the time. Our community was almost destroyed. Sorry to say Trans-gaming could do this again.
Even today the same kind of attack could bring us to our kness.
Sorry Wine Lgpl will not expire in 90 years. Each new release is a new 90 year old count. Be aware a 12 year old version of wine is barely buildable on current day compilers. 90 year old code forget trying to build it.
Nothing about the selection of LGPL has anything todo with Stallman.
LGPL was one of the more commonalty used at the time of the license change. Bethankful for merry. At the time a complete list of licenses that forced source code release were made. The new license of wine was choose from the most common in use and the one that gave the most flexibility to commercial usage. Now if you were wanting us to change to another license that forced source code release but was not GPL compadible but would give us some-other advantage it would be worthwhile debating.
> Everyone know that Microsoft is a loyal, and a honest company
Honest how dare you use that word about Microsoft. Wine was one of the projects that proved Microsoft was using secret API's under the table to have advantage over there competition. We know Microsoft are cheats so don't dare call them honest here again. Samba team also does not call Microsoft honest. Thinking Samba is the officially lead of the standard body for the network protocol MS uses that MS altered without permission and kept secret from the standard body forcing the standard body to take Microsoft to court to meet there legal requirements. So honest and playing fair are not Microsoft.
Trans-gaming targeted to destroy both wine and codeweavers. In there past battle.
Stop saying we hate proprietary. That is saying we hate codeweavers and www.bordeauxgroup.com for there front ends. We are quite willing it sit on the side lines and watch those two duke it out since wine will remain developing either way.
We simple expect proprietray and open source to play fairly. Many 1000~ of man hours have been spent developing wine. If you use the code its only fair to give back.
Simple fact I was around where transgaming came after wine. Remember at that time codeweavers was not a major supporter of wine.
> Replacing LG-PL code with BSD licensed code (like BSD kernel) is possible, and
> Please take contributions from now on, under MIT license so that wine will be completely MIT after 90 years (copyright of WINE LG-PL code will expire).
Thank you for stating you hand. Be-aware MIT does not provide patent coverage in any form. You want to change the license back to what it was. Before we got stung baddy by an aggressive company.
There are basically no pure MIT license projects left. Pure MIT license projects basically get killed by forks not giving code back. We like to keep wine 1 pure license as well this way meeting license conditions is simple and you cannot screw up.
LOL of apache changed to LGPL most of there major users would not bat a eyelid. Reason most of the major users are on the Linux kernel anyhow so have to obey the rules of GPL for it.
IBM changing from apache harmony to openjdk. Big end business has no major issues with LGPL stuff when they are playing fair. Also apache httpd is not pure apache licence either. It contains some LGPL modules.
You do find projects that are pure LGPL as a single license. Its getting rare and rare to find pure permissive license stuff. So you cannot effective compare how effective BSD, MIT and other permissive liceneses are at getting developers because there are basically no tanted projects to compare against the likes of pure GPL and LGPL projects.
Stallman has nothing todo with wine selection of license and stop insult us over it. That some outside force could control the Wine community is impossible. That some outside force could destroy the wine community is possible. No funds no development death follows. Rudeness is not something we have to tolerate. Yes putting a - in someones name who name does not have a - is rudeness.
And don't troll write LGPL as LG-PL it don't have a -. Only trolls write LGPL that way.
I have written many white papers covering license effect on development speeds. Yes writing a modern day one on BSD MIT and other licenses of there class is almost impossible due to almost no application using them being pure any more. In my eyes you are nothing more than a person pulling up troll arguments who has not done there homework on the advantages of the licenses and there effect on development.
More information about the wine-users