Claus Fischer wrote:
As a non-developer, I think this discussion can be considerably shortened by just forking and starting to work on the LGPL branch.
If the current license allows Lindows to make proprietary modifications and not give anything back, it certainly allows Codeweavers/whoever to make proprietary modifications and give back under LGPL.
Those who don't want to even read LGPL code for reasons of 'contamination' just shouldn't read it. You can't read Lindows code either.
Why should Codeweavers be morally pressured to contribute under a steal-me license when steal-it companies don't contribute at all? Just let Codeweavers use their rights that you defend so vehemently for others, and don't critizise them for doing something your favourite license permits.
I personally tend to think that GPL style licenses attract more developers and create a level playing field even for companies as contributors.
Put a snapshot of current CVS somewhere for X11 freaks and start checking in LGPL.
My thoughts exactly.
And don't discuss with morons, especially non-developers ... :-)
:-)
- Dan