I don't know when it started, but Transgaming has been using LGPL chunks of Wine for quite some time.
As they're required to, they've released the source for these files, along with whatever changes they've made. However, they're not required to tell us what they did, to send us patches, or to even let us know they've made a change.
What this means is that it's possible, even likely, that Transgaming has improved the LGPL parts of Cedega in some important way that would be useful to Wine as well, without us having even known about it.
The simplest thing to do is for someone to just track the code they release and diff it against our own stuff, and note if anything new and interesting (eg an implementation of a function) comes up. Then send in a patch if it seems like it could help us too. But, is anyone doing this?
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
Hi Scott,
We mostly haven't made many significant changes to the LGPL DLLs that we've been picking up, other than modifications to allow them to build within our somewhat different build environment.
One place where we have made changes recently was to the iphlpapi DLL, and we recently submitted a patch for that. There have also been a couple of places in some of the crypto code when we've come across a bug, worked through it, and made a fix. But at least twice, a patch has been checked into WineHQ CVS just before we posted our fix.
We'll certainly be trying to submit patches to LGPLed DLLs that we make changes to where we can, but if anyone is interested in helping, we're happy to work with them too.
Take care, -Gav
Scott Ritchie wrote:
I don't know when it started, but Transgaming has been using LGPL chunks of Wine for quite some time.
As they're required to, they've released the source for these files, along with whatever changes they've made. However, they're not required to tell us what they did, to send us patches, or to even let us know they've made a change.
What this means is that it's possible, even likely, that Transgaming has improved the LGPL parts of Cedega in some important way that would be useful to Wine as well, without us having even known about it.
The simplest thing to do is for someone to just track the code they release and diff it against our own stuff, and note if anything new and interesting (eg an implementation of a function) comes up. Then send in a patch if it seems like it could help us too. But, is anyone doing this?
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
Hi Scott,
We mostly haven't made many significant changes to the LGPL DLLs that we've been picking up, other than modifications to allow them to build within our somewhat different build environment.
One place where we have made changes recently was to the iphlpapi DLL, and we recently submitted a patch for that. There have also been a couple of places in some of the crypto code when we've come across a bug, worked through it, and made a fix. But at least twice, a patch has been checked into WineHQ CVS just before we posted our fix.
We'll certainly be trying to submit patches to LGPLed DLLs that we've made changes to where we can, but if anyone is interested in helping, we're happy to work with them too.
Take care, -Gav
Scott Ritchie wrote:
I don't know when it started, but Transgaming has been using LGPL chunks of Wine for quite some time.
As they're required to, they've released the source for these files, along with whatever changes they've made. However, they're not required to tell us what they did, to send us patches, or to even let us know they've made a change.
What this means is that it's possible, even likely, that Transgaming has improved the LGPL parts of Cedega in some important way that would be useful to Wine as well, without us having even known about it.
The simplest thing to do is for someone to just track the code they release and diff it against our own stuff, and note if anything new and interesting (eg an implementation of a function) comes up. Then send in a patch if it seems like it could help us too. But, is anyone doing this?
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
Scott Ritchie wrote:
The simplest thing to do is for someone to just track the code they release and diff it against our own stuff, and note if anything new and interesting (eg an implementation of a function) comes up. Then send in a patch if it seems like it could help us too. But, is anyone doing this?
Why bother?
It's really in their best interest to keep current with Wine.
Continually resolving conflicts and fixing the same bugs we've fixed is a waste of their time, and monitoring their patches is a waste of our time.
The easiest thing for everybody is for original patch authors to submit their patches to wine-patches. If they don't want to do that, it will be harder on them in the long run.
Mike
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 19:38 -0500, Gavriel State wrote:
Hi Scott,
We mostly haven't made many significant changes to the LGPL DLLs that we've been picking up, other than modifications to allow them to build within our somewhat different build environment.
One place where we have made changes recently was to the iphlpapi DLL, and we recently submitted a patch for that. There have also been a couple of places in some of the crypto code when we've come across a bug, worked through it, and made a fix. But at least twice, a patch has been checked into WineHQ CVS just before we posted our fix.
We'll certainly be trying to submit patches to LGPLed DLLs that we make changes to where we can, but if anyone is interested in helping, we're happy to work with them too.
Take care, -Gav
Thank you Gav, that was quite helpful. I guess we are in this together after all.
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 10:37 +0900, Mike McCormack wrote:
Scott Ritchie wrote:
The simplest thing to do is for someone to just track the code they release and diff it against our own stuff, and note if anything new and interesting (eg an implementation of a function) comes up. Then send in a patch if it seems like it could help us too. But, is anyone doing this?
It's really in their best interest to keep current with Wine.
Continually resolving conflicts and fixing the same bugs we've fixed is a waste of their time, and monitoring their patches is a waste of our time.
That makes a lot of sense.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
-
Gavriel State -
Mike McCormack -
Scott Ritchie