Slashdot Mirror


Wine Continues To Move Towards License Change

uhmmmm writes "The Wine developer's votes are in. Wine will change license, as was suggested would happen, but it's not yet decided to what exactly. Alexandre notes 'We now have to decide the implementation details, like the exact license used, whether to require copyright assignments, etc.'"

3 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The BSD license would seem to be best. by radja · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You _think_ it's the best. I disagree. The pro-corporate BSD license allows closing of the source, which means less rights for the user. The GPL doesn't have that problem.

    BSD is not the licence to obsolete all others. the future is dual licencing, IMO.

    //rdj (you don't think I'd claim that extra mod-point, do you?)

    --

    No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
    --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
  2. Re:The BSD license would seem to be best. by GooberToo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not to mention it was specifically stated that they didn't want to use the BSD style license as they felt it was hurting the project. Wow. What a concept. People believe that the BSD license may be hurting their efforts. Last I read, they wanted to use a license which prevented these entities from taking the WINE project and not contributing back to it. Doesn't sounds like they want to be very BSD to me. In fact, sounds like the BSD concept is the root of the desired license change.

    Get over it. A license is a license. Just because you may or may not have a personal opinion on a license one way or another doesn't mean the rest of the world will share your opinion. In fact, it seems the Wine team feels poorly about using a BSD style license. Go figure.

    Lastly, GPL does not have negative connotations unless you've been feeding at the Microsoft camp lately. The concept behind GPL code is simple. Either you get it or you don't. Either you want to contribute back or you don't. There is nothing negative about it other than they simply don't want you stealing other people's efforts unless you're going to return your efforts for the good of all. So basically you are saying that companies don't like GPL code because they can't legally steal it? Sounds like an ethics check is in order.

  3. Re:The results by ethereal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't accept any votes from someone who hadn't contributed code. The choice of the license belongs to those who have contributed to the codebase and no one else. Those non-coders are welcome to voice their opinions, but only in a non-voting capacity.

    --

    Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and