The real way to mount a revolt, of course, would be to
fork wine and maintain a better version of it. The
likelihood of that ever happening seems slim, but
perhaps in 15 years, after HTML 5 takes over and users
no longer run win32 apps, it's possible that something
like that would happen naturally
> As I said, our overlords are kind and benevolent and I'm sure that the
> mention of "evil plans" was simply a joke as such wise and noble
> developers could need harbor a malevolent thought. But, unless I've
> been misreading this mailing list, all patches have to go through our
> current enlight
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Juan Lang wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
>> Not that I have any problems with our benevolent overlords, and not
>> that I would likely achieve franchise with a scant 2 patches under my
>> belt, but I can't help wondering how such a revolt would succeed
>> seeing as the only
Hi Michael,
> Not that I have any problems with our benevolent overlords, and not
> that I would likely achieve franchise with a scant 2 patches under my
> belt, but I can't help wondering how such a revolt would succeed
> seeing as the only method to achieve franchise-hood is controlled by
> the
Not that I have any problems with our benevolent overlords, and not
that I would likely achieve franchise with a scant 2 patches under my
belt, but I can't help wondering how such a revolt would succeed
seeing as the only method to achieve franchise-hood is controlled by
the same people one would b
Hi Folks,
I try to send out a periodic message to the wine-devel mailing list
outlining the 'corporate' structure of Wine and how some decisions are made.
We work with the Software Freedom Conservancy. They manage the pieces
of Wine that benefit from a formal organization, such as managing money
