Re: ddraw.h, dinput.h and dsound.h in Cygwin/MinGW

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> "Peter Ekberg" writes:
> 
>> The problem here is that the MinGW maintainers will not accept
>> LGPL files in what they call the w32api package. Here's a quote
>> from Earnie Boyd on the matter:
>> 
>> "Acceptable licenses would be any approve Open Source license
>> that don't require announcement, registration, force the user to
>> provide their source or otherwise restrict use in proprietary
>> software."
> 
> Then I'm not sure why the LGPL wouldn't qualify, it doesn't add any
> restrictions on the users of the header. Building proprietary software
> against LGPL headers is explicitly allowed, and since the rest of
> MinGW doesn't use these headers then it wouldn't fall under the LGPL
> either. What is the problem you see with the LGPL?

That did occur to me as well, but as I'm not up to speed on all
details of the LGPL, I didn't push the issue prior to my request.
Perhaps I should have...

> (not that I'm necessarily opposed to relicensing, but if you could use
> the LGPL version it would make life easier for everybody)

Well, everybody except Danny and Earnie it seems. I'm obviously pro-LGPL
here, as that means that I can move future improvments from Wine into
w32api without any additional dual license questions. My guess is that
they don't need the inevitable license questions from their proprietary
users. But I personally have no real clue as to why they "dislike the
introduction of  LGPL into the w32api".

Danny, Earnie, why doesn't the LGPL qualify in the w32api package?

Cheers,
Peter