Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SpecOpS Labs Response to Wine Project

Posted by Hemos on from the the-battle-continues dept.

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."

8 of 105 comments (clear)

  1. Hiding nothing? by KoriaDesevis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article:

    David is unique, however we do not claim, nor have we ever claimed that David is 100% our own proprietary code.

    and...

    Lastly, Project David is not a repackaging of Codeweavers CrossOver Office. We are experimenting with some of the open source WINE code but we are not knowingly using any of the Codeweavers source code. Perhaps, Codeweavers has unwittingly released its code back to the WINE Project.

    Ok, it sounds like they're being open and straightforward about it. They are recycling code. They also are putting this little disclaimer that they're not intentionally using CodeWeaver code. All right, if there is a problem, this should put up flags with concerned parties now, instead of waiting until they are all done. It would suck to be all done and then be told they had proprietary code that had to be removed. (This is reminiscent of the SCO situation -- perhaps they're trying to avoid that kind of aggravatiuon now?)

    --
    A love beyond compare...
  2. Re:Shame! by isdnip · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No, no shame. SpecOps was trolling for dollars by keeping quiet about the WINE code they're using. Now they're spinning.

    So in this new letter, they're admitting that there's WINE in there, though not saying how much. And they're adding improvements atop it, which Codeweavers also does. And when it's released, per the GPL, they'll apparently release their modified source code where required. Okay. Whether David is useful or not remains to be seen.

  3. Which version of wine? by trinity93 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If they used code from the MIT-X Licened codebase they could do with it what ever they wanted too as long as they gave credit. This means ship binaries only. Wine has only recently become GPL/LGPL (I forget which, i think it is LGPL) So in the end this discusion could be for nothing.

    .

    --
    We substituted the coffee Slashdot normally drinks with "Sandoz Crystals", Lets see if they notice the difference
  4. I smell a problem by HolyCoitus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We have been working on David for more than two years now. David is an experimental prototype, and is based upon technology that has been evolving over the past 15 years.

    David is unique, however we do not claim, nor have we ever claimed that David is 100% our own proprietary code. We are currently testing and updating our basic system architecture/design, which now uses a combination of open, free and proprietary code/modules from numerous sources.

    Ummmm... The technology has been around since 1989 they say? And developing? But they hadn't gotten that far enough to be able to run simple Windows programs? All this would appear to be is a Wine fork with proprietary additions. That's fine, but I just wonder how much is their own code and how well it will work... We'll just have to wait and see.

    --
    That's scary.
  5. Nothing new... by mike_mccormack_au · · Score: 5, Interesting
    3. Lastly, Project David is not a repackaging of Codeweavers CrossOver Office. We are experimenting with some of the open source WINE code but we are not knowingly using any of the Codeweavers source code. Perhaps, Codeweavers has unwittingly released its code back to the WINE Project.
    Firstly, the bug I pointed out their screenshots is a bug that I personally created to solve another more annoying bug. The bug only exists in CrossOver's implementation of Wine, and will not be merged back into WineHQ because Alexandre(Wine's maintainer) does not like the patch.

    Secondly, we don't unwittingly release any of our code... we deliberately release it all back to WineHQ, as it is written.

    SpecOS labs have done nothing illegal, however the screen shots they posted show that using Wine and some patches merged from Crossover Office's Wine package, they can do what CrossOver Office has been able to do for over two years now - install Microsoft Office. What's new?

  6. Re:Kudos to them by JohnFluxx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yeah you're right, I can't think of any reason.
    Oh wait, common curtesy - that was it.

    You're going to trust a company that is asking for VC money for a product that they aren't even going to say where 90% of the code came from?

  7. members of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    We are members of the Open Source community and understand that...

    I doubt that they have such a good understanding of the community and processes. The most important rule, when developing open source code, is to "release often, release early". However they say that they want to wait until "it is finished". No real commitment, just commercial attitudes.

    But whatever, if they feel it helps their business plan, just let them go. After all, it's their right to do so.

  8. Re:This might help people to migrate: by Queuetue · · Score: 3, Interesting

    a) Crossover Office Already Does This.
    b) Linux has already taken off.
    c) Most people just use OpenOffice and don't worry about office emulation, only compatability. My clients are worried about thier accounting packages, some of which run well under normal wine.