Re: WineX and the AFPL

On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Roland wrote:

> At 02:02 PM 6/5/02 -0400, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
> 
> >Yes, I've come to the conclusion that the real distinction here is probably
> >between those interested in the journey (for which the LGPL and refusal to
> >trade patches makes more sense) and those interested in results (for which
> >patch trading makes sense and the license may be a tossup)...
> 
> I think you misinterpreted me. The Wine coders are also interested in the 
> results, having a working product. That's why they chose the LGPL. It 
> ensures that all code modifications flow back, enabling a fast development 
> of the code. If the folks where just interested in the jorney, they would 
> have stayed with the X11 license.

I think you misunderstood me.  I'm sure nobody would work on Wine if they 
weren't interested in the results to some degree or another.  It's just 
that some people are willing to sacrifice the journey (the experience of 
creating the project), while others are not.  This is what I meant by those 
interested in the journey vs. results.  I assume everyone is interested in 
results; it's a matter of the relative importance.  Alexandre's statements 
would seem to indicate that he's not willing to sacrifice the journey in 
pursuit of a quicker path to the results.

And I don't blame him a bit for that.  He has every right to choose his 
priorities.  I made the mistake of assuming that the results were really 
the paramount objective, which is why his refusal to trade patches was 
confusing to me -- until I realized that he valued the journey more highly.

Of course, I could be wrong about Alexandre's motives.  I'm just drawing 
conclusions from the statements I've seen (and their tone) -- he hasn't 
jumped in to confirm or deny this interpretation.

Deven