At 08:13 AM 2/14/2002, Christopher Dewey wrote: >Brett, you continue to ignore that the (L)GPL implicitly >treats *everyone* as programmers, regardless of their occupation, >motives, intent, or what they actually end up doing with the >software.
Not true. It singles out the activities in which only professional programmers need to engage in order to make a living, and penalizes that group specifically by attempting to prevent them from making a living. "The GNU Manifesto" explicitly states this intent. >The issue at hand is that neither the LGPL, nor the current Wine >license meet every Wine developer's needs and goals, with the >consequense that the development effort spent on Wine may be >slowed or fragmented. Is that possible? What if the goal of some of the developers is simply to sabotage the business models of others? >It's a real problem, and a compromise is required. The current license is far and away the best compromise. The (L)GPL is not a compromise; it is an extreme. The public domain is the other extreme. The X11 license sits in the middle. --Brett
