From: Anders N. <ano...@te...> - 2004-02-08 21:30:19
|
(Sorry about that, accidentally to pressed the send button. Here's the full message) Perhaps a BSD-style license isn't appropriate, considering that it mainly demands that a copyright notice is retained whether distribution is in binary or source form. Conditions from BSD license: 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. 3. The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. There is no copyright holder and no specific author, if anyone has a copyright it is microsoft. The only copyright notices in the headers are in the socket related headers: Portions Copyright (c) 1980, 1983, 1988, 1993 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Portions Copyright (c) 1993 by Digital Equipment Corporation. So perhaps simply making it public domain is the best solution, since it is a mere reproduction of the headers and import libs from the MS platform SDK, with the exception of some short library routines and the screen saver code (which already has a public domain notice). Still of course, we could put some notice that it would be appreciated if improvements/additions are contributed back to other users (i.e mingw since you seem to do the maintaining), which I suppose is the interest of most users of mingw/cygwin/etc to do. And a disclaimer of non-warranty etc. Opinions? Best regards, Anders On s=C3=B6n, 2004-02-08 at 22:12, Anders Norlander wrote:=20 > On s=C3=B6n, 2004-02-08 at 00:36, Mark Collins wrote: > > Hi Anders, > >=20 > > Not too hard to find on Google; it's just that the > > address the Mingw32 developers had > > (ano...@he...) wasn't working. > >=20 > > One reason the license change would be useful is so > > code can be shared between ReWind (BSD licensed) and > > Mingw. ReWind also compiles with gcc so apart from > > certain headers and configuration features specific to > > ReWind, ReWind headers could be incorporated into > > Mingw without much modification, and the reverse. > >=20 > > Areas where Mingw would benefit from ReWind include > > DirectX and miscellaneous smaller files like zmouse.h. > > ReWind would benefit from more complete headers in > > places e.g. for RAS API. Part of the purpose of ReWind > > is for compiling Windows programs on UNIX, so the > > quality/completeness of the headers is as important as > > it is for Mingw and the work might as well be shared. > >=20 > > Incidentally Wine doesn't use the Mingw w32api headers > > (although there are some headers from the Mingw C > > library by Colin Peters used for the msvcrt > > implementation). Also Wine has been under the LGPL > > license for a couple of years now so Wine code cannot > > be incorporated in the Mingw w32api with its current > > license or a less restrictive one. > >=20 > > ReWind is based on the last BSD licensed Wine release > > and continues to use the BSD license. So there is > > greater potential for collaboration with that project. > >=20 > > Another project writing a Windows compatibility layer > > (for NetBSD in this case) is PEACE > > (http://chiharu.haun.org/peace/). They do in fact use > > the Mingw headers already. A license change would be > > mutually beneficial as their license is a BSD-style > > license. > >=20 > > Other projects e.g. wxWindows which have an LGPL (or > > modified LGPL to allow for static linking) or GPL > > license shouldn't find it a problem to have a BSD or > > public domain license for the headers (i.e. there are > > no legal issues in using the w32api even if the open > > source license is different). I can't speculate on > > what concerns the Cygwin project had. See the BSD > > license entry on > > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#ModifiedBSD > > - it says it is compatible with the GPL so it > > shouldn't be a problem for them either (moreover, they > > already include BSD licensed XFree86 code). > >=20 > > The Allegro multimedia library project (public domain) > > has a Mingw port which relies on using Microsoft's > > DirectX headers, so there are definitely areas where > > collaboration with ReWind would be helpful. > >=20 > > Regards, > > Mark > >=20 > > -- Anders Norlander <ano...@te...> wrote: > Hi > > Mark, > > >=20 > > > was I really that hard to find? > > > I haven't been totally out of touch with mingw > > > development, > > > I use it quite regularly, but I have not followed > > > any > > > discussions about development in a couple of years.=20 > > > In fact the company I work for take advantage of > > > mingw as the host environment for the gcc+binutils > > > toolchain for the mophun platform. > > >=20 > > > Now to the question... > > > Initially it was intended to use the "Library > > > General Public License" > > > with a clause that linking to this library did not > > > impose > > > any restrictions on the produced binary. > > > I don't remember the discussions anymore, but at the > > > time there were problems with that and cygwin, I > > > don't > > > remember the reasons. > > >=20 > > > Personally I wouldn't mind changing the license to > > > a BSD style license. But I would like other projects > > > and users of the package to reach some consensus on > > > this matter. Once that is settled I would gladly > > > approve of whatever is decided. > > >=20 > > > Mind starting a thread on the relevant lists or > > > with representatives of the major projects using > > > the package (mingw, cygwin, wine, wxWindows...?)? > > >=20 > > > BTW: I subscribed to the mingw developers list, > > > just waiting for approval. > > >=20 > > > Best regards, > > > Anders > > >=20 > > > On fre, 2004-02-06 at 20:10, Mark Collins wrote:=20 > > > > Hi, > > > >=20 > > > > The Mingw32 Win32 API headers project > > > > (http://www.mingw.org) to which you contributed > > > source > > > > code was considering an alternative license before > > > > Christmas, but couldn't contact you at the e-mail > > > > address they had for you to ask your permission. > > > >=20 > > > > I found this e-mail address with the help of > > > Google so > > > > I could ask you if you would permit changing the > > > > license of the source code you contributed to a > > > public > > > > domain or a BSD-style license, in order that the > > > > Mingw32 project may share code with related open > > > > source projects like ReWind > > > > (http://www.rewind.sourceforge.net) which have > > > > incompatible licenses. > > > >=20 > > > > One of the relevant messages from the Mingw32 > > > > developers mailing lists is below. > > > >=20 > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mark Collins > > > > mar...@ya... > > > >=20 > > > > -- Earnie Boyd <ea...@us...> > > > wrote: > > > > > The original author created most of the license. > > >=20 > > > > > Unfortunately he is=20 > > > > > unreachable. I've already rewritten the license > > > > > once to remove the=20 > > > > > requirement of letting the author know that you > > > were > > > > > using the product.=20 > > > > > We unfortunately missed this license issue > > > before > > > > > accepting his work. > > > > >=20 > > > > > I would enjoy a new license for public domain.=20 > > > What > > > > > is the etiquette or=20 > > > > > protocol for this situation? > > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > =09 > > > > =09 > > > > =09 > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > > > > BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up > > > online today and save =C3=82=C2=A380 > > > http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk > > > =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > =09 > > =09 > > =09 > > ___________________________________________________________ > > BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save= =C2=A380 http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk |