Re: including Qt on Debian
>>"Conrad" == Conrad Sanderson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Conrad> On Fri, 31 Oct 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
Andreas> : > Could you please explain to me why you don't want to
Andreas> include Qt on : > the Debian distribution ? : : its not free
Andreas> software : we may not change it, may not fix bugs, : and if
Conrad> that's a side issue.
No, that is not a side issue for Debian.
Conrad> You can always just ship the binary versions of the Qt
Conrad> toolkit. This doesn't contravene any licensing.
It violates debian's social contract.
Conrad> I know. I am going to ask the KDE people to make 2 versions
Conrad> of the software, since it is the only way some people want to
Conrad> listen. One version will be dynamically linked and the other
Conrad> one statically (hence absolutely NO licensing restrictions are
Conrad> made). Would you then include it as part of your linux
Conrad> distribution ?
Can we freely distribute and modify the source?
Conrad> btw, this is what Qt was trying to change: the bloatedness of
Conrad> statically linking libraries, which everybody has to do with
Conrad> Motif. Qt is free to use. I really don't understand this
Conrad> idealism that something is either completely free or not free
Conrad> at all.
Sorry. But that is the way Debian is. Our social contract
specifies what our goals for Debian are.
"They communicated by tap-dancing and farting."
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .