Re: WineX and the AFPL

On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Roger Fujii wrote:

> Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> > "Roger Fujii" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > "Roger Fujii" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > This test would only be valid if you say that you won't accept any patches
> > > > > given to Rewind that was not expressly intended to be included in Wine also.
> > 
> > [it seems I missed that part somehow]
> > In other words, you are again trying to dismiss the "advantages" on the X11
> > license pointed out by Transgaming? Great.
> 
> huh?  Alexandre's original statement is the we could gauge which is "better"
> by seeing how the different forks come out.  What I said was that this comparison
> would be useless if LGPL tree incorporated all of the Rewind patches.  Let's make
> an extereme case where 99.99% of the code was licensed X11 - saying LGPL is
> "better" because it has .01% more code would be distorting what's going on.
> I'm not dismissing the advantages - I just want to be sure that the advantages
> can be measured.
> 

In a scientific endeavor, one would understand this by experimenting with
different starting conditions... repeating the experiment multiple times
and coming to a conclusion.

In the real world, there is no such option. You pick a road and start
walking. Time moves forward. See Robert Frost "Two Roads".

So asking "I want to be sure..." above does not make much sense.

John Alvord