Re: Problem with InstallShield (Was Re: [Bug 629] Changed - Problemwith InstallShield: ole:CoTreatAsClass(stub), ole:CoGetClassObject)

At 09:29 PM 5/8/02 -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote:


> > But as Alexandre wrote, working on a community project is not about
> > economics, its about having fun and developing together for ALL to
> > benefit from it...
>
>If this is the case, someone making a proprietary version does not
>affect a developer from "having fun and developing together".  If it is
>"ALL", then explicitly excluding a type of development is contradictory.

The point here was, that for many it seemed that it was a one way road to 
TG. TG benefitted a lot, but gave back much less than they could. The idea 
of all benefitting would be everyone giving back as much as possible. Of 
course you are right, we shouldn't force anyone to do so. But then there is 
also no reason to have a X11 license. Just make it LGPL? I'm not sure though.

> > And when someone trys to make money out of it, the whole thing is
> > endangered...
>
>FreeBSD did not suffer from BSDi.  In fact, it benefited from the
>company.  This is not always the case, but I still have not seen a
>company having a negative affect on an open source project with regards
>to code.

Well, how about the Wine project? Some people claim that the development of 
some code has come to a halt. Why? Because TG promised to submit that code. 
So people stopped coding, waiting for that code, which didn't come till 
today. TG is not releasing it for free, but wants to trade it...

> > Probably Transgaming gave the main arguments for switching to LGPL.
> > Here we see again that in the long run it pays off to be generous.
> > Share your goods instead of holding them back...
>
>or else we will use a license to force you?  Not exactly a good means to
>sharing.  If people wanted others to share with them, coercement does
>not provide a good example.  People might as well complain about them
>"blackmailing".

No one is forced to use the LGPL code. All companies use licenses to force 
users to pay for software. The point is, many perceived the license to be a 
disadvantage to the flow of the WINE project. So they decided that the LGPL 
would be better. Only time will tell if they where right.

> > PS: Another problem of the X11 license is, that it allows "embrace and
> > extend" strategies.
>
>This is only a concern with a company that can actually afford to run a
>separate fork by themselves.  I believe Transgaming unable to do this
>even if they wanted to.

Huh? AFAIK every companie has it's separate fork. Otherwise can you tell me 
where I get the code for WineX?

Let me finish by saying that I'm not against the X11 license, in fact I 
favoured it most of the time. Only I came to realize that both licenses 
have arguments in their favour and against them. It depends on the situation.

Roland