Marc, You are missing the #1 point. The following comes from the Free Software Foundation. The URL is:
http://www.gnu.org/ *** What is Free Software? “Free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech”, not as in “free beer”. Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it refers to four kinds of freedom, for the users of the software: The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2). The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. *** You are using proprietary Microsoft libraries. That is the problem, the only problem, and it has nothing to do with the platform. The Express compiler verions will not work because you are using proprietary Microsoft libraries. The compiler versions that do work will not run on W2K because Microsoft breaks backwards compatibility to lock customers into needless and expensive upgrades. The one and only problem with independent developers working on Linux, W2K, or WNTv4 for that matter, is the fact that you have used proprietary Microsoft libraries that Microsoft has deliberately made to work only on XP and Vista, and only then after the payment of substantial fees. Google is not required to support multiple platforms. The concept of free software, when honestly practiced, makes that possible in principle because all of the source has to be made available. The money is not the issue in the GPL license; it is for many developers. The legal issue is the freedom of the software and Chrome, as a whole, is not free because it depends on proprietary Microsoft libraries. There seems to be a potential exception for system libraries in section 3 of the GPLv2. However, it applies to "normal distribution". The issue of system libraries is clarified in GPLv3, in section 1. The key verb in GPLv2 is "normal distribution". The libraries in question are not normally distributed. They cost nearly $800, and since I do not have them, I do not know if they come with source code. That source code is proprietary in any case, so works derived from Chrome cannot conform to the GPL either. Maybe you should expand your team to include some programmers that do not have to build on proprietary Microsoft products when they make "free" software, but such software, by definition, is not free no matter how little it costs. The same problem, basing code on proprietary Microsoft libraries, is why the SketchUp SDK is not freely available. I hope Google is working on this seriously because it really clouds what at first seemed a very bright light. Ken On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:14:57 -0400, you wrote: > >Everyone missed the #1 point. Beside politics, there's a primary issue. > >There is no way to buy a Windows 2000 license as of today. Due to the >settlement of the Sun-Microsoft case, Microsoft can't legally sell >Windows 2000 license anymore. I can't get a buildbot on Windows 2000 >anymore. And we can't support a platform that we can't test on a >buildbot. And no, we won't use an old Pentium 120mhz as a buildbot. :) > >Thanks for your comprehension. > >M-A > >2008/9/11 Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 11:58 PM, sfrahm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> To help Chrome begin to work expediently on Windows 2000 would only >>> take a single expression of cooperative intent towards the open source >>> community. Yes, we are thankful that the source is openly available, >>> but a spirit of cooperation would go much farther than the >>> antagonistic attitude seen to date. The open source community will do >>> the rest for you. Patiently and kindly and also for free. That's what >>> they do. >> >> I hear there are a number of workarounds in Chrome for >> problems with Win2k. Maintaining them may become a burden >> someday. The mainline might benefit from discarding these workarounds. >> >> That would of course make win2k chromium users sad. >> (Perhaps it would inspire them to migrate to Linux, as you are doing :-) >> Do you think there are enough win2k chromium developers to >> maintain a win2k branch that carried forward the win2k workarounds? >> - Dan >> >> > >> > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
