RE: Clarification on my call for license change
On Fri, 2002-02-15 at 09:49, Roland wrote:
At 08:19 AM 2/15/02 -0600, Jeremy White wrote:
Several people have asked me to clarify my original post.
I just don't understand one thing: How does your company expect to make money once WINE is xGPLed? If all your code has to be contributed back, why should I buy it from your company?
Well, for one, we have a proprietary product that links to Wine; we would continue to sell that.
For another, we would continue to sell services to organizations who wish to use Wine, but can't because it isn't complete enough.
And finally, we would sell services to organizations that need to depend on Wine, but cannot do so without the assurance of qualified support to back up that dependence.
So you have answered the first question. CodeWeavers might survive. Good for you. But the second more important question was (in my words): Why should I buy a Wine distribution from you? If you are forced to contribute back everything I can just do: cvs update ; ./configure ; make install What I and other have been trying to say is that some business models like consulting business makes sense with a LGPL:ed Wine but others like Transgaming:s might not. Read what Gavriel wrote in his first(?) reply again.
Patrik Stridvall wrote:
On Fri, 2002-02-15 at 09:49, Roland wrote:
At 08:19 AM 2/15/02 -0600, Jeremy White wrote:
Several people have asked me to clarify my original post.
I just don't understand one thing: How does your company expect to make money once WINE is xGPLed? If all your code has to be contributed back, why should I buy it from your company?
Well, for one, we have a proprietary product that links to Wine; we would continue to sell that.
For another, we would continue to sell services to organizations who wish to use Wine, but can't because it isn't complete enough.
And finally, we would sell services to organizations that need to depend on Wine, but cannot do so without the assurance of qualified support to back up that dependence.
But the second more important question was (in my words): Why should I buy a Wine distribution from you?
If you are forced to contribute back everything I can just do:
cvs update ; ./configure ; make install
What I and other have been trying to say is that some business models like consulting business makes sense with a LGPL:ed Wine but others like Transgaming:s might not. Read what Gavriel wrote in his first(?) reply again.
I have been avoiding this debate although reading it closely. However i thought i would step up to the plate on this one, as someone whose salary depends on Jeremy's vision. The simple of it is.. you, Patrik, would not buy a Wine distribution form us. Why would you? You are a developer, and a wine developer on top of that. If your critical app crashes you can just hack on the code and make it work. In fact we dont really expect anyone on this list to buy a Wine distribution from us. However if a company unfamiliar with Wine, or even linux wants to get a critical app working on Linux using Wine they have to choose. The could hire a developer and have that person figure out wine and do the work, or buy a distribution of Wine supported by proven Wine developers. It is these sorts of people and companies that we want to target. And financially Patrik's money for his license or even the money form all the wine developers would be nearly insignificant compared to a 100+ seat site license. As a developer who has worked on far too many proprietary Wine trees and seen all the fights the Jeremy has gone through. I want to be assured that i can give my code back to the wine community. -aric aric(a)codeweavers.com
At 03:02 PM 2/15/02 -0600, Aric Stewart wrote:
As a developer who has worked on far too many proprietary Wine trees and seen all the fights the Jeremy has gone through. I want to be assured that i can give my code back to the wine community.
-aric aric(a)codeweavers.com
Hmm, I think you should also mention that this favours your business: the more amount of WINE code that is freely available, the easier it is for your companie to serve future clients. Thus you are also acting on your own interest here...lets just be honest, ok? With other licenses your client would probably demand, that the code you produce for him remains HIS copyright, so you would not be able to make further use of it. Best regards, Roland
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 03:06:04PM -0300, Roland wrote:
At 03:02 PM 2/15/02 -0600, Aric Stewart wrote:
As a developer who has worked on far too many proprietary Wine trees and seen all the fights the Jeremy has gone through. I want to be assured that i can give my code back to the wine community.
-aric aric(a)codeweavers.com
Hmm, I think you should also mention that this favours your business: the more amount of WINE code that is freely available, the easier it is for your companie to serve future clients. Thus you are also acting on your own interest here...lets just be honest, ok? Haha, let me just nullify this for you :-) You could just as well have added in the same sentence that this will put Codeweavers out of business faster because everything just will "magically work" and nobody needs anyone to fix anything any more ;-)
-- Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany Tel. +49 7159 800604 http://home.nexgo.de/andi.mohr/
participants (4)
-
Andreas Mohr -
Aric Stewart -
Patrik Stridvall -
Roland