RE: driver question

[Patrik Stridvall]

> On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 11:23:06PM +0300, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> > I'm not an expert on licensing, and I thought to ask this
>
> question here - I'm
> > not trying to make any emails flame war - just need a
>
> simple answer...
> > A friend of mine is toying with an idea to write a frame
>
> buffer driver instead
> > of the x11drv on wine, but he doesn't think his boss will
>
> allow to release
> > the code..
> > Can he (legally) write the driver, bundle it with the
>
> lgpl'd  wine and sell
> > it? or is this illegal?
>
> If the driver interfaces with the rest of Wine through a 
> clearly defined
> library API, and his proprietary code is distributed as 
> separate object
> code that can be relinked with Wine at runtime or at build time (i.e.,
> made available as either .o files or as a .so shared lib), 
> then this is
> unquestionably permitted by the LGPL.

True in general but unfortunately the Wine display driver API
wouldn't IMHO be classified as a clearly defined API...

So whether this is allowed is a little unclear to say the least.

driver question

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 11:34:14PM +0200, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 11:23:06PM +0300, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> > > I'm not an expert on licensing, and I thought to ask this
> >
> > question here - I'm
> > > not trying to make any emails flame war - just need a
> >
> > simple answer...
> > > A friend of mine is toying with an idea to write a frame
> >
> > buffer driver instead
> > > of the x11drv on wine, but he doesn't think his boss will
> >
> > allow to release
> > > the code..
> > > Can he (legally) write the driver, bundle it with the
> >
> > lgpl'd  wine and sell
> > > it? or is this illegal?
> > If the driver interfaces with the rest of Wine through a 
> > clearly defined
> > library API, and his proprietary code is distributed as 
> > separate object
> > code that can be relinked with Wine at runtime or at build time (i.e.,
> > made available as either .o files or as a .so shared lib), 
> > then this is
> > unquestionably permitted by the LGPL.
> True in general but unfortunately the Wine display driver API
> wouldn't IMHO be classified as a clearly defined API...
> So whether this is allowed is a little unclear to say the least.

Perhaps I've relayed it in an unclear manner, but that's my failing, not
the LGPL's.  When I say it must interface with the rest of Wine through a
clearly defined API, I mean that any changes you make to existing Wine
APIs in order to interface to this new driver must be released under the
LGPL: you can only keep those parts of your code closed which do not
include portions of someone else's LGPLed code.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer