On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:17:47PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > [...] I said it's not a problem for the MinGW SIG (ie. Fedora), but > > it is a problem for the libvirt project. > > So it is that important to you to permit someone to distribute > proprietary libvirt-based applications that run *on windows*? > Is providing this sort of enablement important to Fedora? IMHO, yes. We've had alot of feedback that people really like the libraries we provide for managing virtualized Fedora / Linux hosts, and they'd like to make use of our libraries in their existing closed source management tools. Not having Windows support for our management tools is a show-stopper for many potential users though. So by providing libvirt client bits on Windows we enable more people to deploy & manage virtualized Fedora hosts. This will increase the number of people using Fedora and virtualization which is a good thing for the Fedora community. It also helps the libvirt community which becomes a defacto standard open source managment API across platforms, at a time when all other virt vendors would rather their users were locked into proprietry custom APIs & tools. If we only provided GPL'd libraries for libvirt on Windows they simply won't use libvirt or Fedora virtualization, pushing more people towards closed source virt solutuons like VMWare Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
