Re: WineX and the AFPL

On 3 Jun 2002, Alexandre Julliard wrote:

> The problem is not the competition, the problem is Transgaming's
> promise to release the code. If they made it clear from the start that
> their code was going to remain proprietary, it would be much less of a
> problem. It might still take users/testers away from Wine, but at
> least not developers.

I don't know what promises they made.  Certainly, if they claimed they 
would release the code, then they ought to live up to that commitment.

> Of course the problem will solve itself once people realize that
> Transgaming's promises are empty and that the code is not coming back,
> and they will most likely start working on DirectX again. But we will
> have lost a couple of years, and Microsoft is not standing still
> during that time.

In the grand scheme of things, is DirectX really one of the most important 
things to be working on?  If it's more of a moving target than other areas, 
won't it take even more effort to keep up?

The Wine project originally targeted 100% Windows 3.1 compatibility.  Now, 
it's too late for that to matter.  Achieving that original goal would be of 
very limited value now that Windows 3.1 is obsolete.  Today, having 100% 
compatibility with Windows 98 (or at least Windows 95) would be the minimum 
useful goal, but not for much longer.  By the time Microsoft is able to 
drop support for Windows 95/98, they'll have successfully raised the bar 
again, and Wine will have to retarget Windows NT/2000 or more likely XP 
instead, which will be correspondingly harder.

At least basic Windows 95/98 support is a relatively stationary target, and 
has been for several years, because of the difficulty Microsoft has had in 
forcing upgrades on end users who consider Win95/98 "good enough".  They're 
trying to find ways to force users to stay on the upgrade treadmill, and if 
they're successful, the constant moving target will be back in spades.

By expending so much effort on games, has Wine missed the (possibly last)
opportunity to try to hit a stationary target instead of a moving target?

> You still don't understand how open source development work. Of course
> people are working on Wine to make their apps work. Some care about
> games, some care about Office, Juno, Eudora, etc.  If we were to
> reject all these contributions because the developers are not "pure"
> enough, or because they dare have other interests in life, Wine would
> be absolutely nowhere.

I don't misunderstand open-source development.  I'm just saying that there 
may have been some gamers who looked like typical open-source developers, 
but were perhaps really just gamers following the most expedient means of 
meeting their specific goals, with no interest beyond that.  Most of the
open-source developers out there, even if motivated by their own personal 
interests, tend not to be so single-minded about it.

Once they've become involved in a project and join the community, they have 
a vested interest in the project itself, above and beyond their personal 
interests that may have drawn them to participate in the first place.  Any
gamers who walk away from the Wine project (and community) due to finding 
their needs met be Transgaming, must not be committed to the Wine project.
Gamers who stick around to work on other things obviously aren't in this 
category.

I'm not suggesting that you reject any developers, whether committed or 
not.  However, the committed developers are the project's greatest asset, 
because they'll keep coming back over and over again to improve the code, 
even in areas where they initially had no interest.  Uncommitted developers 
will walk away, and you'll only have the work which sustained their limited
interest to show for it.  True, that's better than nothing, so you might as 
well take it.  But if uncommitted developers walk away, it really shouldn't 
be much of a surprise.

> The *only* reason Wine can do what it does today is because of all
> these people who have done a bit of work here and there to make their
> favorite app work better, and because they enjoyed doing that more
> than going to the movies. Implying that these people are somehow not
> "true" Wine developers is an insult to the whole community.

I'm not trying to insult the community, nor those who may have walked away.  
I'm only saying anyone who walked away wasn't really a full and committed 
member of the community -- or else they wouldn't have walked away.

In fact, I'm not even saying that anyone HAS walked away.  I'm saying this 
could explain the damage you've described.  I don't know firsthand about 
any such damage.  I'm just aware that serious gamers will frequently go to 
truly extraordinary lengths to further their interests in gaming, and it 
seems probable that some gamers would even go to the length of performing 
significant development work on Wine solely in pursuit of thier gaming 
interests -- and never fully engage in the community or the project itself.

Even from the outside, it's been obvious for several years that a LOT of 
effort has gone into improving the gaming support under Wine.  Sure, some 
of this was surely done by committed Wine developers who happened to also 
have an interest in gaming.  It also seems likely that some of this effort 
came from hardcore gamers uninterested in the Wine project for itself.

In fact, it was your comments about the dearth of DirectX development and 
the general loss of enthusiasm for gaming in the Wine community that both 
led me to consider this possibility, and seemed to confirm the effects from 
such involvement by hardcore gamers.  If you weren't complaining about it, 
it never would have occurred to me in the first place.

I don't KNOW whether any such developers exist.  It's only a hypothesis, no 
more.  However, it's a plausible hypothesis.  (If you don't think so, you 
must not be familiar with any truly hardcore gamers!)  The only reason I'm 
even offering the hypothesis for consideration is to point out that there 
are other plausible explanations for the "damage" you assert Transgaming 
and their business model has caused to the Wine project.

Now, your hypothesis may be correct.  Maybe Transgaming has done serious 
and substantial harm to the Wine project.  I don't know.  I'm just asking 
if there's other possible causes for the effects that concern you, that 
would justify a hardline stance.  It's like "reasonable doubt" in criminal 
law -- if you think someone did something dastardly, but there's reasonable 
doubt because another possibility seems sufficiently plausible, should the 
"guilty" party be punished?  (Not that you have to live up to the standards 
of criminal law, of course, but it's food for thought.)

> Marcus explicitly said that Transgaming took away all the fun of
> working on DirectX for him. Marcus is probably one of our most
> committed developers, and after me he is the one who has been around
> for the longest time. Sure he has been doing some other things, but
> nowhere near the amount of stuff he was doing on DirectX. And note
> that the other thing that Marcus has been working on, the COM support,
> would be thrown away if Transgaming finally released theirs. Just a
> nice way to decrease his motivation even more...

That's not what I meant.  Yes, it sounds like Marcus is a committed Wine 
developer; I have no reason to question that.  He have have lost interest 
in working on DirectX due to Transgaming, but did he walk away from the 
entire Wine project as a result?  From your comments, it sounds like he has 
not, which is what I would expect of a committed Wine developer.

This is not an example of a committed Wine developer abandoning their 
efforts, but only redirecting them to a different area of Wine.  In the 
narrow sense of his DirectX efforts, he may have abandoned those, but his 
efforts in that area represent an opportunity cost to other areas, since he 
is a committed developer who would work on something else if not DirectX.

I was asking if you had any examples of a committed Wine developer walking 
away from the entire project due to proprietary coding, not just turning 
away from one area to focus on another.  The former is tangible damage to 
the project, while the latter is typical of any open-source development 
work where the area of focus shifts according to the whims and interests of 
the developers doing the work...

> Of course they'd have stopped working once they achieved their goal,
> or picked another goal. What's wrong with that?  When Wine does
> everything I want it to, I will stop working on it too. Does that make
> me an uncommitted developer?

Are you going to walk away the instant all your applications work well 
enough for you, or only if you get burned out or if the project feels 
"done" in general?  I'm guessing you won't walk away from the project just 
because the applications you happen to use are working well.  But a gamer 
only interested in his games might well do just that.

> As certain as before. And if you expect to convince me with your
> arguments, you have a lot more research to do first on what is really
> happening in the Wine community.

As an outsider, there's a limit to my knowledge of the happenings within 
the Wine community.  Much as I might like to join the community myself and 
become a committed Wine developer, I'm realistic about it.  There are many 
other projects calling for my attention, and Wine is just one of many I'd 
like to contribute to.  Unfortunately, because of the scope and complexity 
of Wine, I feel unable to have much effect with small contributions, and 
I'm not currently in a position to make large contributions.  I just don't 
have the time.  Perhaps someday I might, but I'll just have to remain an 
outsider for now.

As for convincing you, I don't know that I can.  It certainly seems that 
your mind is made up, regarding Transgaming.  You may indeed have excellent 
reasons for your decision.  I'm not telling you that you've made the wrong 
choice, but only offering some alternative possibilities, just as "food for 
thought" for you to consider.  Maybe some of those ideas will cause you to 
pause and reconsider, maybe not.  So be it.

You're entitled to your opinions.  You have every right to refuse to trade 
patches with Transgaming.  I don't know if it's the right or wrong thing to 
do, but the potential benefits of collaboration do suggest that refusing is 
best done for compelling reasons rather than casually.  I'm not suggesting 
that you've decided casually, mind you -- but there may be some ideas you 
didn't take into consideration initially.  Whether or not those ideas are
sufficient cause for reconsideration is a separate question.

I only spoke up in the first place because you seemed determined to spurn 
their advances, and I wasn't sure if it was for compelling reasons or more 
because they rubbed you the wrong way, somehow.  After all, there is a 
precedent here, whether or not Transgaming in particular is worthy or not.

Maybe I'm giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt.  There's been 
some history here that has clearly engendered some ill will, and as far as 
I know, it may be richly deserved.  Be that as it may, I'm not sure that 
the simple act of trading a few patches really puts the Wine project into 
mortal danger as you sem to suggest.  Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I'm 
sure that it's not a one-way street -- if you trade some patches now, that 
obviously doesn't obligate you to continue doing so in the future.

Since you could easily turn back at any point, it just seems odd that you 
would be so steadfast in refusing to trade patches, unless it's a personal 
thing with Transgaming.  If that's the case, then by all means refuse on 
those grounds.  You don't have to trade with them if you dislike them.  But 
to suggest that the LGPL is the only reasonable form of trade seems a bit
extreme and arbitrary.  It sounds like a rationalization of a decision made 
more for personal reasons than ideological ones.  I guess that's why I've 
been questioning the rationale behind it.

In the end, you'll do as you choose.  That's your right.  But if it's for 
personal reasons, it would be better to say so.  After all, it's possible 
that some other proprietary company might want to trade patches, and it 
might be to the benefit of them AND the Wine project, and if so, there's no 
reason why their hypothetical offer should be tainted by any disreputable 
actions that may (as far as I know) have been taking by Transgaming...

Deven