Slashdot Mirror
WiX Project Lead Interviewed On CPL Licensing
comforteagle writes "After Microsoft released WiX (Windows Installer XML) under the CPL I found it odd that so many interviews following were with almost everyone but the project lead. So, for your Friday enjoyment I've posted an interview with Rob Mensching, Wix Project lead, who sheds a little light on what's going on behind the scenes at the Shared Source Initiative from the ground." Mensching explains: "My bosses were not involved in the decision which license should be used for the Windows Installer XML toolset. I worked with members of the Shared Source Initiative team who understand the details of the various licenses available to share source code. They listened to my requirements and found that the CPL seemed most appropriate for the toolset."
for those of you who don't know, "wichs" is slang for "choad" in German.
"wichsen" (sounds like vixen) means to polish, but is usually assotiated with polishing a certain body part. Wichs (or Wix) would be the noun.
***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
wixen, wichsen, v.: to wank
Mensching: "I am not well versed in all of the licenses used by the Shared Source Initiative. As I described above, I went to the Shared Source Initiative team with the goals of my project and we agreed that the CPL was an appropriate license for the Windows Installer XML toolset."
Other types of shared source license programs at Microsoft, and further links in the Shared Source Initiative.
Actually it wasn't.
Okay, so that explains the why structured storage files were chosen for the base file format, but why use a relational database format in the first place? On this point, my memory was better. Relational databases were just the "in" thing at the time. Picking a relational database file format in the mid-1990s would be kinda' like picking XML as your file format today. I have to wonder if, in five year's time, anybody will be questioning why the heck so many developers picked a verbose, text based file format for so many of their applications.
-- robmen
but Orca
NSIS, while good at what it does, does not generate MSI packages.
Making MSI packages is a pain, so this project is welcome.
That said, I have no interest in it beyond Windows; MSI is a good attempt at package management, though it is not as nice as the package formats of RPM or DEB and the associated tools. (Yes, there are about a dozen 'necessary' additions and changes to RPM/DEB & tools I'd like to see.)
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
The EULA of VS.Net tries to forbid it.
This is of course totally non-binding and non-enforceable. When you create something ( the source of your program), you hold the copyright o f that something and can licence it as you wish.
I want a new law, which puts the same legal penalties on a lawyer for writing false legal notices ( known to be bullshit or unenforceable) as false legal advice : possible disbarment and malpractice lawsuits.
I know most /.'s will find this hard to believe but M$ has always provided a huge amount of source code in an open source fashion. Just visit MSDN and you'll see of examples of free sample code. Then go to the code center where you can find tons of free demonstration applications that you can use to build your own app. For example the company I work for has used User Interface Process Application Block for .NET and Exception Management Application Block for .NET from their patterns and practices site to form the basis of an Enterprise scale business application. Of course the code is generally sample applications for Business purposes. But code like this has been available from M$ since before the internet boom.
So you needed a license model that does NOT allow sharing between REAL open licenses but looks open enough.
The Open Source Initiative thinks the CPL is "open". It allows derivitive works, grants no-royalty patent licenses to recipients (although only specifically for the program they receive), and allows source redistribution. It doesn't require source redistribution, but then neither do several other "open" licenses.
So what's the problem?