On Mon, 23 Dec 2002, Hetz Ben-Hamo wrote:
> > so it's an LGPL product that I buy with patches but no source as
> > binary-only? It sounds terribly illegal to me for them to do that,
> > and against my ideals to give them money for it.
>
> No, they put their patches in the wineHQ cvs in a timely manner, not
> all at once.
>
> There are some parts which are not part of the wine tree (like the reboot,
> etc) which are closed source. If those parts will be open source, they won't
> make any money from the product.
So: is wine really LGPL-ed?
How come a propriertary piece of code be part of that product? Is that a
separate binary? a special clause in the license?
("won't make any money" is a moral justification, but still does not make
anything legal)
--
Tzafrir Cohen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
