On 2002.02.17 02:50 Sean Farley wrote: > On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 12:06, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Marcus Meissner wrote: > > > > > And especially: > > > > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&selm=1szq0fy8sm.fsf_-_%40lrcsuns.epfl.ch > > > > OK, > > > > What about this: > > > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ingo+Molnar+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine&hl=en&selm=67ue48%24ajm%241%40palladium.transmeta.com&rnum=3 > > Linus's quote was quite interesting: > > I don't personally contribute - partly because of the same worries > that Ingo Molnar brought up some time ago, ie the copyright. It's > not that I dislike the wine copyright - I actually think that the > BSD-style copyrights can be a good thing. But _personally_ I don't > want to do significant work under that kind of copyright and having > to wonder whether the best version of Wine will be free in the > future.. > > That was almost the same as Brett's message concerning working on Wine > if it was xGPL'd. > Almost, but not quite. Brett's quote seemed more like he was trying to hold it over our heads like "See, I won't contribute if you go LGPL and you'll lose all the wondeful commercial developers like me!". Linus's quote was more like "I won't contribute if you're not under a copyleft, but I have no vote so take that as nothing more than my opinion". Then it was left at that, there was no ongoing argument for a week about it. Linus was certainly more tactful.
In other words, I took Brett's attitude as being hostile towards the project from the beginning but when I read Linus's comments there was no hostility involved. Maybe it is just that Linus is a better writer. > > or this: > > > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ingo+Molnar+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine+group:comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine&hl=en&selm=349af265.0%40news.ic.sunysb.edu&rnum=9 > > This made me wonder about what happened to TWIN. I noticed they faded > away. If anyone thinks xGPL'ing WINE will bring more support, they > should look at TWIN. I am not saying the license killed it, but I am > saying that the LGPL did not bring it any support. > I am about 99% sure that TWIN was released under LGPL after Willows had no interest in it whatsoever. Back in the day Codeweavers did a lot of projects by combining Twin and WINE into "Twine" and using that to do ports. So Jeremy is certainly no stranger to using an LGPLd Wine-like project for his business. -Dave
