The MingW32 project is developing its own set of Windows headers under a different license than Wine (which uses LGPL, right?) and I have noticed (using both projects) that the Wine headers are more complete in a number of areas. I was wondering if it would be acceptable to use the Wine headers as a source for filling in gaps in the MinGW32 headers? In essence, would the Wine group be willing to allow this cross pollination since (clearly) it would be a violation of the licenses as they stand today. Any thoughts on this? Or am I treading into a minefield?? :-) -- Anthony Tuininga anthony(a)computronix.com Computronix Distinctive Software. Real People. Suite 200, 10216 - 124 Street NW Edmonton, AB, Canada T5N 4A3 Phone: (780) 454-3700 Fax: (780) 454-3838 http://www.computronix.com
Although Wine is LGPL'ed now, older wine versions (till around march/april 2002 I think) are X11 licensed. Further there is a "fork" of Wine called Rewind which is more up2date than the last X11 edition of Wine. So those things can atleast be used by the mingw project. Relicensing parts of the current Wine is more complicated. I'm not the right person to talk about that. Likely a vote for it would be needed since I think all people who worked on the headers need to approve it. Roderick Colenbrander Op donderdag 31 juli 2003 16:24, schreef Anthony Tuininga:
The MingW32 project is developing its own set of Windows headers under a different license than Wine (which uses LGPL, right?) and I have noticed (using both projects) that the Wine headers are more complete in a number of areas. I was wondering if it would be acceptable to use the Wine headers as a source for filling in gaps in the MinGW32 headers? In essence, would the Wine group be willing to allow this cross pollination since (clearly) it would be a violation of the licenses as they stand today. Any thoughts on this? Or am I treading into a minefield?? :-)
Le jeu 31/07/2003 à 13:52, Roderick Colenbrander a écrit :
Although Wine is LGPL'ed now, older wine versions (till around march/april 2002 I think) are X11 licensed. Further there is a "fork" of Wine called Rewind which is more up2date than the last X11 edition of Wine. So those things can atleast be used by the mingw project.
Relicensing parts of the current Wine is more complicated. I'm not the right person to talk about that. Likely a vote for it would be needed since I think all people who worked on the headers need to approve it.
I'd say it's the same thing as MS headers: you can't directly copy them (MS's or Wine's), but the #defines FOO 123, etc. can be used (since they're factual and needed for work correctly). Somebody (dis)agree with this? ReWind can be used directly, as it's license allow you to do that. But keep in mind that many times, Wine's headers have Wine specific parts, which Mingw will probably have to ditch or modify. Vincent
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 07:52:40PM +0200, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
Likely a vote for it would be needed since I think all people who worked on the headers need to approve it.
Well, as you mention correctly in the second part: Everyone who submitted patches under a LGPL license only *must* agree to have their code reclicensed. Calling that a vote reminds me of some pseudo democracies .... Ciao Jörg -- Joerg Mayer <jmayer(a)loplof.de> We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
The interfaces are public information and can be gotten from any number of means. I dont know why we even have license information in the headers as it has caused confusion from day 1 the LGPL statment was added. If you are still worried about using the WINE headers to fix Mingw (It needs it) then use ReWind. Thanks Steven
Op donderdag 31 juli 2003 16:24, schreef Anthony Tuininga:
The MingW32 project is developing its own set of Windows headers under a different license than Wine (which uses LGPL, right?) and I have noticed (using both projects) that the Wine headers are more complete in a number of areas. I was wondering if it would be acceptable to use the Wine headers as a source for filling in gaps in the MinGW32 headers? In essence, would the Wine group be willing to allow this cross pollination since (clearly) it would be a violation of the licenses as they stand today. Any thoughts on this? Or am I treading into a minefield?? :-)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
participants (5)
-
Anthony Tuininga -
Joerg Mayer -
Roderick Colenbrander -
Steven Edwards -
Vincent Béron