Is Wine taking my donations and giving them to CrossOver?

muncrief · Post by **muncrief** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:23 pm

Well I must say.

I certainly feel like a fool now.

I have been contributing to Wine for about five months, and was shocked to see a blatant advertisement for CrossOver, who take the hard work of those who have contributed their intellect for free and sell it for profit, on your home page.

I then discovered through your own FAQ that most Wine developers are employed by CrossOver.

Is this legal?

To claim you are an open source project and take money from those contributing in good faith, and give it to a private for profit company?.

I don't think so.

So I must be misunderstanding something.

Could someone please explain, clearly, whether Wine is an open source project or not? And whether or not Wine purposely cripples it's game playing and other capabilities so that CrossOver can prosper?

There must be a logical explanation, or people who were fooled into donating would have sued Wine for fraud long ago.

Sam Fourman Jr. · Post by **Sam Fourman Jr.** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:41 pm

the web page states
CodeWeavers proudly supports the Wine project.

so maybe since winehq.com is hosted by codeweavers as stated on the
right side of their homepage. maybe it is a swap wine advertises
codeweavers in exchange for hosting?

just a guess.

Sam Fourman Jr.

John Drescher · Post by **John Drescher** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:45 pm

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 10:23 PM, muncrief <[email protected]> wrote:

Well I must say.

I certainly feel like a fool now.

I have been contributing to Wine for about five months, and was shocked to see a blatant advertisement for CrossOver, who take the hard work of those who have contributed their intellect for free and sell it for profit, on your home page.

CrossOver provides the servers for several of the wine pages.

I then discovered through your own FAQ that most Wine developers are employed by CrossOver.

Is this legal?

Yes. Unlike TransGaming, Crossover is helping to develop wine. This is
the same way redhat helps develop linux.

To claim you are an open source project and take money from those contributing in good faith, and give it to a private for profit company?.

I don't think so.

So I must be misunderstanding something.

Could someone please explain, clearly, whether Wine is an open source project or not?

Wine is definitely open source.

And whether or not Wine purposely cripples it's game playing and

other capabilities so that CrossOver can prosper?
There is no intentional crippling of wine for CrossOver to prosper.

John

hendrik · Post by **hendrik** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:59 pm

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 10:44:49PM -0400, John Drescher wrote:

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 10:23 PM, muncrief <[email protected]> wrote:
Could someone please explain, clearly, whether Wine is an open source project or not?

Wine is definitely open source.

As such, anyone is free to enhance it, and redistribute the enhanced
system under any terms they want, providing they satisfy the
requirements of the open-source licence.

-- hendrik

Dan Kegel · Post by **Dan Kegel** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:45 pm

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 7:23 PM, muncrief <[email protected]> wrote:

I have been contributing to Wine for about five months,
and was shocked to see a blatant advertisement for CrossOver,
who take the hard work of those who have contributed their intellect
for free and sell it for profit, on your home page.

The company is Codeweavers, not crossover (crossover is their product).
And they are singlehandedly responsible for keeping Wine alive
and vibrant for the last six or so years.

So, if you like the Wine project, you should like Codeweavers.
It's that simple.
If they go out of business, Wine is in big trouble, IMHO.
- Dan

vitamin · Post by **vitamin** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 11:30 pm

muncrief wrote: I have been contributing to Wine for about five months, and was shocked to see a blatant advertisement for CrossOver, who take the hard work of those who have contributed their intellect for free and sell it for profit, on your home page.

I then discovered through your own FAQ that most Wine developers are employed by CrossOver.

Is this legal?

Well as far a the license (LGPL) goes anyone can take Wine's code, modify it a bit and sell it. As long as they make those modifications available to the public. However Codeweavers are not just takers, they are the biggest giver to the project who employs most active Wine developers. Who otherwise would not be able to spend that much time on the project.

If you talking about donated money which go into "Wine party fund". AFAIK that's not much money to pay even for one's developer full time job. So the next best thing - that money is being used to organize Wine conferences and pay some expenses for developers who can't do it themselves.

muncrief · Post by **muncrief** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 2:21 am

Well, I think I have a clearer picture of what is going on now.

And I thank all of you for your responses.

It appears that unfortunately there weren't enough open source software users such as myself who actually donate what they can so that Wine could viably exist, so Wine essentially became an R&D resource for CodeWeavers.

I have no problem with that.

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project. And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than the company that employs them.

So I will halt my donations to Wine, which were falsely solicited.

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid for your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because they contribute to the open source community, but are honest about what they do and do not take and release to it.

But if you go to VMWare's home page you would never mistake them for an open source project

But Wine's home page presents you as just that, and only that. You are indeed misrepresenting yourselves.

And my original question was never answered.

Was the money I donated to a supposed open source project given to a for profit company?

jeffz · Post by **jeffz** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:10 am

muncrief wrote:Well, I think I have a clearer picture of what is going on now.

And I thank all of you for your responses.

It appears that unfortunately there weren't enough open source software users such as myself who actually donate what they can so that Wine could viably exist, so Wine essentially became an R&D resource for CodeWeavers.

Just as it's a R&D resource for anyone else, you can make a product using wine and sell it if you feel like it. That's how it's licensed, as free software.

muncrief wrote: I have no problem with that.

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project. And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than the company that employs them.

Wine is an open source project, it's licensed under the LGPL.

muncrief wrote: But Wine's home page presents you as just that, and only that. You are indeed misrepresenting yourselves.

And my original question was never answered.

Was the money I donated to a supposed open source project given to a for profit company?

Someone else might answer that, but I'm fairly sure vitamin is right.

Reece Dunn · Post by **Reece Dunn** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:04 am

On 28/03/2008, muncrief <[email protected]> wrote:

Well, I think I have a clearer picture of what is going on now.

And I thank all of you for your responses.

It appears that unfortunately there weren't enough open source software users such as myself who actually donate what they can so that Wine could viably exist, so Wine essentially became an R&D resource for CodeWeavers.

Wine does viably exist. Yes, it is supported by CodeWeavers, but that
is like RedHat or Ubuntu. There are many people who contribute here
and there that are not part of CodeWeavers (like me and many others),
and the community is thriving and will continue to expand and grow
independently of CodeWeavers, but in large thanks to CodeWeavers.

If CodeWeavers were to shut down (which would be a very sad day), the
people working there would still continue to develop Wine, and would
rally around to find a new host for the website.

I have no problem with that.

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project. And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than the company that employs them.

Since when is it not open source? It is released under the LGPL open
source license.

If you are worried about CodeWeavers not giving back to Wine, they do.
Almost all the code they publish for Wine gets merged back into Wine
(which some other companies do not); aside from that, the source code
for the CrossOver version of Wine (to comply with the open source
license) is available at http://www.codeweavers.com/products/source/.

CodeWeavers are responsible for the advancement of the installer,
DirectX and much more in Wine. Remember the announcement that Wine
supports Photoshop CS2, that's because of CodeWeavers. Also, check out
http://www.codeweavers.com/about/people/blogs/.

So I will halt my donations to Wine, which were falsely solicited.

How so? Personally, I have been purchasing copies of CrossOver when I
can, as this directly helps fund development of Wine, such as work on
the DIB engine that will improve game performance.

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid for your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because they contribute to the open source community, but are honest about what they do and do not take and release to it.

What's not honest about http://www.codeweavers.com/about/philosophy/?

But if you go to VMWare's home page you would never mistake them for an open source project

But Wine's home page presents you as just that, and only that. You are indeed misrepresenting yourselves.

Again, Wine *is* an open source project. CodeWeavers is a hybrid
company that uses open source, giving back to the community, while
providing additional (proprietry) features as separate projects (e.g.
bottles), a quality assurance and support.

And my original question was never answered.

Was the money I donated to a supposed open source project given to a for profit company?

It's not. I assume that you are referring to the "Paid Support" link
on winehq? If so, this is different from making a donation to Wine
itself.

See http://www.winehq.org/site/contributing#wpf for information on
donating to Wine itself. From that link "The purpose of the Wine Party
Fund is to show appreciation to Wine developers by collecting funds
for developer meetings, such as future Wine Conferences, or in some
cases to purchase documentation." Nowhere does that say that the money
goes to CodeWeavers.

I hope that clarifies things and answers your original question.

- Reece

Dotan Cohen · Post by **Dotan Cohen** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:14 am

On 28/03/2008, muncrief <[email protected]> wrote:

Well, I think I have a clearer picture of what is going on now.

And I thank all of you for your responses.

It appears that unfortunately there weren't enough open source software users such as myself who actually donate what they can so that Wine could viably exist, so Wine essentially became an R&D resource for CodeWeavers.

I have no problem with that.

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project. And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than the company that employs them.

So I will halt my donations to Wine, which were falsely solicited.

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid for your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because they contribute to the open source community, but are honest about what they do and do not take and release to it.

But if you go to VMWare's home page you would never mistake them for an open source project

But Wine's home page presents you as just that, and only that. You are indeed misrepresenting yourselves.

And my original question was never answered.

Was the money I donated to a supposed open source project given to a for profit company?

No. The money that you donated to Wine stays within wine. It's that simple.

Like you, Codeweavers also supports the wine project. You support wine
with money. Codeweavers supports wine with hosting and patches. Much
of the work Codeweavers does goes directly into wine. That is in
contrast to others who use the wine codebase, such as Transgaming.

What distro do you use? Similar analogies can be found for all open
source software. Some examples:
1) Sun Office, which is related to Open Office
2) Fedora, which is related to RHEL
3) Ubuntu, which is related to Canonical
4) KDE, which (through Qt) is related to TrollTech (and now Nokia)
5) ???
6) Profit!

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
×

Gonesolo · Post by **Gonesolo** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:38 am

I never knew that codeweavers were such strong supporters of the Wine project. However I downloaded the demo of Crossover Games last night and was very successfull getting many of my games working with no problems.

In fact the "bottle" mechanism in Crossover lets me get over my problems with OPENGL support needed for Eve which breaks another of my games in Wine.

However after 2 long years as a cedega subscriber (and getting burned badly) I'm very happy to support the WINE project. So not only will I be buying my copy of Crossover but I will continue to contribute here and as an application maintainer for Wine.

L. Rahyen · Post by **L. Rahyen** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:29 am

On Friday March 28 2008 07:21:30 muncrief wrote:

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project.
And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than the company
that employs them.

You are mistaken. As far as I know Codeweavers contribute ALL source code
back to WINE (only exception is some hacks that aren't acceptable for WINE
for obvious reasons; but this is very minor difference).
You may ask, if so, why CrossOver exist? What is the difference between WINE
and CrossOver, if Codeweavers contribute all their work to WINE? Well,
CrossOver have some hacks that aren't acceptable for WINE (as I already
said). But there is no much of them, so this is very minor difference. In
fact, WINE often works *better* than CrossOver (CrossOver is always "behind"
because it use somewhat old code-base of WINE). But CrossOver comes with
commercial support, some additional GUI and this is main difference.
Personally I used both WINE and CrossOver but in my case WINE worked better
because of newer codebase, so I don't use CrossOver anymore (though I tried
different version of its demo) and I like WINE more because it always newer
and better. CrossOver in my opinion only can be better if you need some hacks
that it offers or commercial user support. I don't need this so I'm using
WINE.
In other words, WINE is open source project and its functionality *isn't*
limited because of existence of CrossOver.
Just think about work made by Codeweavers like some kind of donation for WINE
Project.

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid for
your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because they contribute
to the open source community, but are honest about what they do and do not
take and release to it.

You confusing some things. VMWare have *limited* (for commercial reasons)
contribution to open-source. VMWare mostly offer commercial products.
Codeweavers contribute all their code except hacks that aren't acceptable,
and they *do* work to minimize number of hacks used by improving WINE.
Codeweavers *aren't* owners of WINE. They are separate company. But they did
a lot of donations (by sending patches) to WINE Project.
There is another company, Transgaming. This is an example of company who have
*limited* contribution to open-source for commercial reasons (like VMWare).
They contributed very little of their work back to WINE Project - but they
are using WINE for commercial purpose, and don't donate anything back (like
patches or something else) for a long time.

So, if you still didn't understand something - feel free to ask. But you must
understand that Codeweavers are separate company who donate their work for
WINE; they do not limit functionality of WINE itself, and they contribute
their work back to WINE Project. So you see in news information about their
products just for this reason - because they are donated a lot of their work
for WINE Project.
As you can see, both Wine project and Codeweaver are honest about what they
do. You just misunderstood some things.

David Gerard · Post by **David Gerard** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:53 am

On 28/03/2008, Gonesolo <[email protected]> wrote:

In fact the "bottle" mechanism in Crossover lets me get over my problems with OPENGL support needed for Eve which breaks another of my games in Wine.

As I understand it, the "bottle" mechanism is a glossy interface on
having different WINEPREFIX settings. So you can do just the same in
winehq Wine, it's just fiddlier and needs the command line.

- d.

bill lam · Post by **bill lam** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:18 am

Gonesolo wrote:

I never knew that codeweavers were such strong supporters of the Wine project.

There are detail in codeweaver's site that wine is a beneficiary of codewaever
but similar info does not appear in winehq. IMO codeweaver should come out of
the dark and proudly place a eye-catching banner "wine project sponsored by
codeweavers". This does not contradict with open source, the developers still
have to feed their children.

just my 2 cents.

Dan Kegel · Post by **Dan Kegel** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:43 am

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:21 AM, muncrief <[email protected]> wrote:

Well, I think I have a clearer picture of what is going on now.

And I thank all of you for your responses.

It appears that unfortunately there weren't enough open source
software users such as myself who actually donate what they can
so that Wine could viably exist, so Wine essentially became an
R&D resource for CodeWeavers.

You've got it kind of backwards. Codeweavers is an R&D resource for Wine!

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project.

That's just plain wrong. Wine is completely open source, under the
LGPL license.
Even the "enhanced" version of Wine that Codeweavers sells is
open source; see http://www.codeweavers.com/products/source/
where you can download the source of their latest release.

And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than
the company that employs them.

Not sure what you mean.

So I will halt my donations to Wine, which were falsely solicited.

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid
for your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because
they contribute to the open source community, but are honest
about what they do and do not take and release to it.

Codeweavers has contributed far more to the open source
community than VMWare, IMHO.

Was the money I donated to a supposed open source project
given to a for profit company?

How did you donate it? If you followed the instructions at the
bottom of http://www.winehq.org/site/contributing, your
donation is probably sitting in the Wine Party Fund, waiting
to help defray the cost of the next Wine developer conference.

Does that answer your questions? You seem to have gone off the
deep end a bit. Hopefully my answers are a lifeline to pull you
back into shallower waters!
- Dan

John Drescher · Post by **John Drescher** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:40 am

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid for
your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because they contribute
to the open source community, but are honest about what they do and do not
take and release to it.

VMWare has only a very limited contribution to the open source
community and its software is definitely not open source. On top of
that I have found (at work) that the free versions of its server
software appear to be intentionally broken (performance seriously
degrades over time). This was not just on one single server it was on
many. After contacting technical support over that the general
reaction from their support is that no one should use VMWare server in
a production environment you need to buy esx server. And at that time
(2 years ago) esx server was more expensive for me then buying
additional servers when you consider the cost of the reoccurring cost
of the license. I believe it was $750 (or more)/box per year. I just
checked and it appears that the price has gone down considerably but I
have moved on and replaced all the operations that I used VMWare with
at work with true open source solutions (virtual box, xen, vserver and
openvz) and they all work and work well at what they do. And when I
have problems with either for the most part I get help and not pushed
into buying some expensive closed source product.

John

Phobos · Post by **Phobos** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:51 am

muncrief wrote:Well, I think I have a clearer picture of what is going on now.

And I thank all of you for your responses.

It appears that unfortunately there weren't enough open source software users such as myself who actually donate what they can so that Wine could viably exist, so Wine essentially became an R&D resource for CodeWeavers.

I have no problem with that.

The problem I have is that, of course, Wine is not an open source project. And whether "official" or not, must offer something less than the company that employs them.

So I will halt my donations to Wine, which were falsely solicited.

If you had been honest in the first place, I might have happily paid for your products. I have given over $500.00 to VMware because they contribute to the open source community, but are honest about what they do and do not take and release to it.

But if you go to VMWare's home page you would never mistake them for an open source project

But Wine's home page presents you as just that, and only that. You are indeed misrepresenting yourselves.

And my original question was never answered.

Was the money I donated to a supposed open source project given to a for profit company?

by your wording, I can see you don't understand at all what's going on hehe...

simply put, WINE is an opensource project... all opensource projects depend on the people that contribute to it and most of the time, people does this on their free time and do not get paid for it

companies can use and/or sell opensource software themselves as is or as their own product with their modifications... depending on the license under which it's distributed, these companies have to opensource their modifications too (this is the case with WINE under the LGPL)

so, companies using WINE must opensource their code too (this motivated the short discussion with Parallels' people, who did not opensourced their modifications at first)... but in Codeweavers' case, they take it ever beyond this obligation...

not only they free their code, they employ WINE developers to further enhance it. This means, people are being paid by Codeweavers on WINE, instead of just waiting for them to have spare time to use to work on WINE

Codeweavers sell support and a somewhat ease of use for WINE and WINEPREFIX... this is a common denominator on opensource-based companies. Red Hat, Ubuntu, MySQL, PHP (Zend), the new Acquia with Drupal.... and many others

there's nothing wrong with this... it is actually desirable... companies investing on opensource projects

you don't seem to understand also that VMware barely collaborates with the community... only when it means good business for them... for example, they wanted to make their VDI a standard on the linux kernel... a bait few took...

Codeweavers is an opensource "all-in" company (quite the contrary from VMWare which is a 98% proprietary and closed company)... if you want to contribute to some Virtual machine, I think you better check the opensource VirtualBox http://www.virtualbox.org, instead of VMware

just as a little extra history, Transgaming and their product Cedega is based on an very old version of WINE that had another license that allowed anyone to take the code and close it... to prevent this, the LGPL was chosen for later versions of WINE

John Drescher · Post by **John Drescher** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 11:22 am

The company is Codeweavers, not crossover (crossover is their product).

Sorry. I knew that I and I can not believe I repeated it from the
original post. Must have been doing too many things at once...

John

oiaohm · Post by **oiaohm** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:14 pm

Dan Kegel miss the important thing about the wine party fund. It is clearly stored in the hards of a independent third party.

http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/ << So how money is used from this is above board. Must be used for wine relegated things. That may be acquirement of key documentation or funding wine developer conference or even helping developers without the money to get to a conference. No all the developers are paided well like the ones working at codeweavers. I am very thankful for codeweavers for providing core wine developers with a home.

Last time I looked codeweavers also covered the cost of the developers they pay to go to confs. Most likely still the case. Since its advertising of the existence of code weavers.

There are many more developers who are part times where the party fund is a great help.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that code weavers will sell developer time to get particular programs working in wine. This is just good open source business operations. Biggest sell able item is time.

It would be interesting to have a value on code weavers yearly donations to wine it would have to be a very large figure. That money has to be recovered threw some means. As long as code weavers keeps on treating wine with respect and care I will not have a problem with them.

Dotan Cohen · Post by **Dotan Cohen** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:22 pm

On 29/03/2008, oiaohm <[email protected]> wrote:

Dan Kegel miss the important thing about the wine party fund. It is clearly stored in the hards of a independent third party.

I don't know how long you've been using wine, but I think that you
should google Dan's name before making a statement like that. This is
not the OOo or Ubuntu list, and Dan is just a tab more in the know
than the ordinary list member.

http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/ << So how money is used from this is above board. Must be used for wine relegated things. That may be acquirement of key documentation or funding wine developer conference or even helping developers without the money to get to a conference. No all the developers are paided well like the ones working at codeweavers. I am very thankful for codeweavers for providing core wine developers with a home.

Last time I looked codeweavers also covered the cost of the developers they pay to go to confs. Most likely still the case. Since its advertising of the existence of code weavers.

There are many more developers who are part times where the party fund is a great help.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that code weavers will sell developer time to get particular programs working in wine. This is just good open source business operations. Biggest sell able item is time.

It would be interesting to have a value on code weavers yearly donations to wine it would have to be a very large figure. That money has to be recovered threw some means. As long as code weavers keeps on treating wine with respect and care I will not have a problem with them.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
×

James Hawkins · Post by **James Hawkins** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:27 pm

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Dotan Cohen <[email protected]> wrote:

On 29/03/2008, oiaohm <[email protected]> wrote:
Dan Kegel miss the important thing about the wine party fund. It is clearly stored in the hards of a independent third party.
I don't know how long you've been using wine, but I think that you
should google Dan's name before making a statement like that. This is
not the OOo or Ubuntu list, and Dan is just a tab more in the know
than the ordinary list member.

Whoah there. There was no slander in his remarks. He merely stated
that Dan left an important piece of information out, which he did. No
harm, no foul.

--
James Hawkins

Dan Kegel · Post by **Dan Kegel** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:39 pm

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Dotan Cohen <[email protected]> wrote:

On 29/03/2008, oiaohm <[email protected]> wrote:
Dan Kegel miss the important thing about the wine party fund.
It is clearly stored in the hards of a independent third party.
I don't know how long you've been using wine, but I think that you
should google Dan's name before making a statement like that. This is
not the OOo or Ubuntu list, and Dan is just a tab more in the know
than the ordinary list member.

No, he's right, I should have mentioned it.
- Dan

Dotan Cohen · Post by **Dotan Cohen** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:15 pm

On 29/03/2008, Dan Kegel <[email protected]> wrote:

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Dotan Cohen <[email protected]> wrote:

On 29/03/2008, oiaohm <[email protected]> wrote:
Dan Kegel miss the important thing about the wine party fund.
It is clearly stored in the hards of a independent third party.
I don't know how long you've been using wine, but I think that you
should google Dan's name before making a statement like that. This is
not the OOo or Ubuntu list, and Dan is just a tab more in the know
than the ordinary list member.
No, he's right, I should have mentioned it.

I see on the "contributions" page that it clearly states who holds the
funds. It seemed to me like oiaohm was insinuating that Dan, or the
wine devs in general, deliberatly withheld that information.

I did not mean to be hostile, rather quite the opposite. However, both
in person and in writing my style is that which is taken to be hostile
when that is not my intention. I apologize if I appeared to attack
oiaohm.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
×

oiaohm · Post by **oiaohm** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:48 pm

Just for future reference Dotan Cohen I am a person who provides support in #winehq on freenode. I have to deal with these problems from time to time with the codeweaver + wine relationship. I don't have registration with the wineusers mailing list since I get over 200 emails a day from my current mailing lists so I use the forum.

Even I could have made a mistake and missed something important I would expect Dan Kegel or others to pull me up on it.

Yes the information was on the other side of the link. Problem you can never trust user to go there and read it.

I have been using wine since 1995. I would never normally attempt to insult Dan Kegel. Only reason is that we would have lost our cool with each other and would need cooling off. That would require a complete different of option.

I was in the wine-users mailing list under a different name that account is now no more.

Sorry to say I am a blunt person my writing style reflects this. So sometimes I appear lot more insulting than what I am trying to be.

Dotan Cohen · Post by **Dotan Cohen** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:04 pm

On 29/03/2008, oiaohm <[email protected]> wrote:

Just for future reference Dotan Cohen I am a person who provides support in #winehq on freenode. I have to deal with these problems from time to time with the codeweaver + wine relationship. I don't have registration with the wineusers mailing list since I get over 200 emails a day from my current mailing lists so I use the forum.

Even I could have made a mistake and missed something important I would expect Dan Kegel or others to pull me up on it.

Yes the information was on the other side of the link. Problem you can never trust user to go there and read it.

I have been using wine since 1995. I would never normally attempt to insult Dan Kegel. Only reason is that we would have lost our cool with each other and would need cooling off. That would require a complete different of option.

I was in the wine-users mailing list under a different name that account is now no more.

Sorry to say I am a blunt person my writing style reflects this. So sometimes I appear lot more insulting than what I am trying to be.

I also appear insulting when that is not my intention, and this may
have been the case now. I did not mean to insult you, even if I
sounded that way.

The situation had appeared to me that someone new to the list, who
might not recognize Dan for the contributor that he is, was implying
things in the wrong. I had intended not to insult but to remind the
unfamiliar name that not everyone on the list is as green as he is,
and that he should check with whom he is speaking before insinuating
that Dan, and the whole wine team, is hiding something.

Again I apologize if I was too aggressive.

Dotan Cohen

http://what-is-what.com
http://gibberish.co.il
×