I don't think they are doing anything with this now. Nigel Horne over at ClamAV told me they were looking for someone to do it. I'm waiting for ClamWin 1.0.

Regards,

When can we expect the real time scanning of clamwin?

There has been no release date set for real-time scanning. It involves a complete re-write of the ClamWin code, and there is no full-time development people working on it. If you are able to help, contact the ClamWin team.

Regards,

I don't understand why Clamwin team doesn't release real-time scanner as soon as possible, unless reaching vrsion 1.0 as mentioned. Is it really so difficult? I doubt it.

This cause me afraid that Clamwin will somehow become commercial software after version 1.0.
As I saw, some GPL softwares have violated the GPL rules after benefited from volunteer developers. They were changed to commercial software suddently in recent years, no matter by renaming the software or other methods.

Hopefully, Clamwin will not walk in this way, since it is really a very nice scanner.

Why don't you download the code and finish it

I wouldn't worry about the GPL being violated by the ClamWin developers. The problem is that there's really only two of them (Alch and Sherpya). They did a wonderful job on this project so far but they have to make a living too, so unfortunately they can't work on ClamWin all day.

If you know anyone with programming skills (mostly C# and C++ for v1.0) that wants to contribute, encourage them in anyway you can.

the project of real time scanner and v1.0 will be "commercial" in a different way
mainly related to support and subscriptions to deployment updates
(or at least this is an idea)
the antivirus will remain free and gpl
except the kernel module for the realtime that is derived
from microsoft ifs example filter and the license
of ms wdk does not allow to release it as open source
The kernel module will be free of charge

the code for the windows service and the gui is already in the subversion repository
https://clamwin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/clamwin/trunk/clamwind/ https://clamwin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/clamwin/trunk/clamwind/
the prototype is "working" and it can work without the kernel filter
(the component should be made as a different download due of the license restriction)

there is no gpl violation while communicating with a kernel driver
we are against gpl violations, we also have some examples of using our stuff
without releasing source like pclive
ClamWin is an opensource project so why it should become proprietary and
violate gpl? clamav code is copyrighted by the clamav team
I doubt we'll have advantages to close the source of the current python gui
(the only part we are hypothetical entitled to change license)

of course also my other projects are still opensource
see https://oss.netfarm.it/ https://oss.netfarm.it/

clamwin project started by alex (alch) and still maintained by him does
exists since 2004, alex handled it and made clamwin.com
infrastructure and support, without using proprietary software
or restrictions for users, even users that are donating to support
the project are in any case "privileged".
I would make you think about the human resources needed
to handle all the clamwin infrastructure (main site, forums support etc)
and also money needed for hosting
clamwin team still pretends nothing from users

other guys are helping too without any money reward, e.g. budtse
works on the localized version, some users are doing beta-testing
and other ones contributed translations/manual

and I repeat still free and without any money rewards

so we still resemble you peoples that willing to do a similar thing?

this is the our vision
unfortunately we don't have enough development resources at least for now

at that link there.. i see No mention of Win 98/ME operating system(s)

Does it mean if real-time protection EVER becomes available for ClamWin, it will NOT be available for Win 98/ME platform(s) .. or .. that above link has nothing to do with "Win 98/ME being included in real-time protection" (if it EVER becomes available of course)?

Thanks