SpecOpS Labs Response to Wine Project

Kelly McNeill writes "osViews/osOpinion received the following letter from SpecOpS Labs. This letter is in response to the WINE HQ Weekly Newsletter, Issue 222 dated May 14, 2004, entitled "PROJECT DAVID USES CODEWEAVERS CROSSOVER OFFICE". Their objective in writing this letter is to clear up some of the issues raised on the statements contained in the aforementioned Newsletter, which they believe might misrepresent their efforts to expand the availability of Windows applications on Linux."

Comments

Google Cache shows a complete 180

[Robotron2084]

Gotta love the google cache:

Project David Overview

Project David Architecture

Project David Technology

Umm....THIS is what the 'furor' is over. If you're going to use open source software, it has to be, like, open. This does not in any way, shape or form mention WINE, that they use open source, but only states that they've found the magic elixir that gives +10 to windows emulation.

Of course it doesn't give them pointy horns either, but it does destroy their credibility. And what's up with 50 simultaneous developers? Can anyone verify if that number's at ALL realistic?

hmmm... some gossips?

[john_uy]

i heard there are some squabbles inside the group especially with the programmers. i don't want to expound specifically but it may affect the outcome of the software (as with the delay?)

also heard that they are not believed by some it companies here. (with grain of salt)

from the philippines here so i "hear" some things from the industry.

i don't want to pass judgment because i have not seen the product yet. but it makes me wonder what differences it has with applications such as wine.

here is a link (from a local newspaper about the issue just today.

Re:Interesting Software Development Strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, if I'm missing something (quite possible) let me know. But the way I'm reading this ... if I modify the source, compile said source - all fine and well. If I make even one copy of the result, I need to make source available. This would seem common in a project distributed among "... up to 50 developers working simultaneously ..."

If you really want to know the answer, consult a lawyer. For what it's worth, however, allow me to inform you that your opinion differs from that of the FSF: the GPL FAQ claims that you only need to make source available if you distribute a copy of the software to someone outside your organisation. And even then you only need to make it available to people who already have the software - you are not obliged to give it to any Tom, Dick, or Harry who asks.

Re:Interesting Software Development Strategy

[aallan]

Even if you make a tiny modification, you have to make the authors aware that such a modification exists.

No. If you modify a piece of GPL code you are under no obligation to make the authors aware of it. You are also not under any obligation to distribute the changed source code unless you release your modified version of the program. You are still under no obligation to inform the original authors that you have made changes (and released) a version of their code, so long as you release the changed source code with your binaries.

The only obligation you have under the GPL in this respect is that if you release it, and it's GPL'd, you have to release the source code with it.

Al.