| 1 |
On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 13:54, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Why should these people get money for using technology provided by the |
| 3 |
> > wine project? |
| 4 |
> > I know this sounds a lot like a flame, but they took the years of work |
| 5 |
> > of the wine project, added some value and started selling it. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Because the old wine license allowed it? There is no other reason. |
| 8 |
> Your comments here *are* a flame. Followed immediately by a praising of |
| 9 |
> the almighty GPL... |
| 10 |
Not allmighty. In some circumstances the GPL is not usable. |
| 11 |
But _if_ (theoretically) the wine project had used the GPL from the |
| 12 |
beginning no other project could have profited (in a monetary sense) |
| 13 |
from their work. |
| 14 |
But since they did not think that anybody would abuse the licensing |
| 15 |
freedom from their old license they did not use the GPL. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I had the privilege of listening to Mr. Stallman in person, and I |
| 18 |
understood his idealism. It's a moral obligation to keep our freedom, |
| 19 |
and the GPL is one method of keeping software free. |
| 20 |
> > That's were Stallman and the GPL come in: The GPL keeps your work |
| 21 |
> > available for all. Other licences may be abused. |
| 22 |
> There is plenty of reason for other licenses, otherwise they would not |
| 23 |
> exist. For example, if I wanted to create an open source application, |
| 24 |
> yet also create a feature-enhanced binary only version, a BSD license |
| 25 |
> would be a perfect choice for me to select. |
| 26 |
Yes, but as a "Free" Software Developer the BSD license is almost unacceptable |
| 27 |
since everybody and his dog can take your software. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> Transgaming is no longer simply issuing "patches made to wine", but |
| 30 |
> rather a quite changed product that was *derived* from wine. This is a |
| 31 |
> major distinction. Transgaming made a simple request. Nobody is |
| 32 |
> whining but you. |
| 33 |
You are stomping around on semantics. derived or patched, where do you draw |
| 34 |
the line? From my point of view winex is an extensive patch to an older |
| 35 |
version of wine. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
And yes, they made a simple request, but to me it sounds like "Stop |
| 38 |
giving away the software we 'borrowed' from someone else" |
| 39 |
I really dislike the licensing terms of transgaming, and I suppose their |
| 40 |
CVS was made available to reduce the flak from Open Source Fanatics :-) |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> If it feels wrong to you, then don't use it. Don't develop for them. |
| 43 |
> It is that simple. |
| 44 |
Yes. But I have a strong conviction that other people should be made |
| 45 |
aware of the surrounding issues. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> Microsoft's shared source is a poor example for |
| 48 |
> obvious reasons. |
| 49 |
Because it includes Microsoft? |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives