Clarification on my call for license change

[Roger Fujii]

Aric Stewart <aric at codeweavers.com> wrote:
> The simple of it is.. you, Patrik, would not buy a Wine distribution
> form us. Why would you? You are a developer, and a wine developer on top of that.

What seems to be the most commercially successful mode on top of opensource
is to have an opensource base and have a value-add component - but I have
yet to see a successful mode that has no propriatary component.

> It is these sorts of people and companies that we want to target. And
> financially Patrik's money for his license or even the money form all
> the wine developers would be nearly insignificant compared to a 100+
> seat site license.

uh, how can you sell a N-seat site license with something that is covered
by *GPL (since this would be a violation of the license)?  If your model
is to sell by seat, I would like you see the reasoning between the difference
of a 10 seat license and a 100 seat license with the *GPL.
 
> As a developer who has worked on far too many proprietary Wine trees and 
> seen all the fights the Jeremy has gone through. I want to be assured that
> i can give my code back to the wine community.

As I said before, if a copyleft is all that is needed, choose a copyleft
that makes SENSE.  LGPL may be convienient, but I have seen no rational
argument in having the *GPL's brand of copyleft (other than it's widely
used).  I think the mozilla project would be a good place to look...

-r