Re: FreeQt ?
> But if OSS, X-Free and QT all operate along similar lines, thats 3, there
Umm, no, XFree86 does *not* work that way. Though they do release
non-source timebombed betas, they always release full-source "real"
releases. You can ignore the betas (as debian does, I mean they are
*betas* after all.) But when 3.3 comes out, everyone will have the
same up-to-date sources and binaries. Nothing similar to OSS and QT
at all.
As for OSS -- I had the impression that if I submitted patches to make
the modules *accept* command line arguments, they wouldn't be
included. But yeah, if they're straight GPL'ed that's good enough; I
could still distribute such patches even if they weren't included.
(and actually, everything in the *kernel* sources looks fine; I think
I was probably interpreting stuff that I saw on the usslite website.
So strictly speaking we're back to *one* bad example, which is QT...)
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: