[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Clarification of WineX packaging request



On Sat, 25 May 2002 05:13, Gavriel State wrote:
> After having read a few of the comments on our request not to have WineX
> added to Debian, I thought that I should clarify a few things.
>
> First of all, we have made, and hope to continue to make, substantial
> contributions to free software projects such as Wine and now ReWind.  I
> think our record on this front speaks for itself to anyone who cares to
> browse the wine-patches archives, or look at some of my recent posts on
> wine-devel.
>
> As for the ITP, we have no intention of forcibly stopping Debian from
> packaging the current version of WineX.  Our license allows you to do so,
> provided that none of the servers that serve the non-free archive are
> supported by advertising, or other commercial activity.

It sounds like WineX is not suitable for main then, non-free at most.

> We have merely asked (politely, I think) that you not do so, out of concern
> for our ability to continue financing our ongoing development efforts, as
> well as to avoid confusion with our full download release which includes
> support for copy protection, and binary DLLs which we have the right to
> redistribute, but not to sublicense.
>
> If Debian goes ahead and packages WineX despite our request, we will have
> to evaluate how that is affecting our financial situation, and determine
> whether we should change our license to restrict any future binary-packaged
> redistribution, regardless of commercial or non-commercial intent.  It
> would certainly be our preference not to have to do so.

So how can we best serve the needs of our user-base and the wishes of our 
developers?

IMHO if you request that we don't include the packages in the main Debian 
release and instead use contrib or an external site then that would be OK.

Requesting that it never be packaged at all is impossible.  Even if the 
overwhealming majority of developers vote against packaging it, it only takes 
one person to package it and put it online.  If it came to a vote it could be 
excluded from the Debian site against the wishes of the packager (although 
this is extremely unlikely).

But I think that this entire situation is not in your financial best 
interests.  Since I first read about WineX I have wanted to try it, at one 
time I even wanted to package the SourceForge code for Debian.  However most 
times I wanted to try it out it didn't even compile!

If someone packages the code then I'll have a good opportunity to try it out 
and see if it's as good as it claims to be.  If so and if the commercial 
version comes in Debian packages then I'll be happy to pay for it (I presume 
you take AmEx).  I have a number of Windows games that I wish to play...

Also if the commercial version is not packaged for Debian then you have an 
opportunity here, you could probably convince the Debian developer who 
packages the free code to also develop packages (or an installer package) for 
the commercial code and contribute them back to you.


If your product does what it claims to do, and I had a reasonable opportunity 
to test it out then I would almost certainly have purchased a copy long ago.

-- 
If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines
of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do
whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by
posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: