Re: Time for some Clarity (KDE, Qt, Open Source...)
Kevin Atkinson <kevina@clark.net> wrote:
> In the process you also discovered that that due to a confusing
> license the kdebase package is illegal. Also you seam to think that
> Troll Tech does not want you to distribute their software.
NO.
I think that Troll Tech doesn't want us to distribute their software
under the terms we distribute Debian. I'm sure they'd have no problem
with us changing what we're doing to fit their model.
> For there statement of the Qt issue go to
> http://www.kde.org/whatiskde/qt.html. If you still see a program with
> kdebase then you are redefining the term paranoid.
I think by "a program" you meant "a problem".
Also, I think you're moving from discussing technical issues to
personal criticism. If you would please limit yourself to discussing
objective facts, maybe we'd have something to talk about.
Finally, I don't see anything in the above URL that talks about the
issue I raised.
> As far as Qt goes read the FAQ at http://www.troll.no/
> faq-freeedition.html before you start arguing over the legal aspects
> of it.
The requested URL /faq-freeedition.html was not found on this server.
> Also check out the announcement of the KDE Free Qt Foundation
> at http://www.troll.no/announce/foundation.html.
This still doesn't resolve the licensing conflict. It does suggest
that the KDE license is not intended to mean what it says, however.
> Also read /usr/doc/qt*/copyright included with any of the Qt packages
> for a dissusion of packaging Qt.
I've already read the Qt license.
> The orignal reason I even brought the topic up is becuase I would like
> to see Debain get more user friendly. In fact I wanted Debian to be
> THE model for a complete user friendly system.
Which is a fine goal as long as it doesn't override our underlying
quality and distribution goals.
> Things I would like to see:
> An extremely easy to use install program that groups things not by
> the particular program names but buy there functionality. For example
> instead of having just one large X windows section have a sub category
> called viewers then from there have options for gif, jpg, dvi, gs etc.
Er.. "more user friendly" typically means doing what the user wants
without requiring them to make complex choices. Also, for the case of
viewers, there are many viewers which will handle more than one kind of
image. If the user has sufficient space, it's probably the right thing
to just give them all relevant viewers...
> Based on what views the user wants it will install the nessasary
> programs. If the user wants to control exactly what's installed there
> would be a option to prompt them for conformation. The system will
> naturally support the addition of additional packages such as the
> Debian non-free section.
Of course, our current system does support this.
> Once installed an extremely easy to configure system. Linuxconf
> sounds good here. The system needs to be easy to use but powerful
> enough to get the full functionality out of the programs. Ie, not just
> some cheap configuration scripts/utilities.
Again, ease of use means minimizing the choices (restrict to only the
choices which are required by the user). Also, full functionality is
different in different contexts.
You're right that there's a lot more we can do in this area.
> A coherent documentation section. No more of this info, man, html,
> plain text, etc documents files all over the place. The system will
> orignise all documents in a logical fashion under one system. HTML
> sounds like the best canadate as info and man pages can easily be
> converted to HTML. As much as possible the HTML would be lynx frindly
> so that people don't need X to use the view the documentation.
A coherent documentation section requires indexing the documentation
properly. The distinct format issue is something of a red herring,
and is better addressed by a proper mime-capable viewer. Which maybe
means that lynx needs to be enhanced in some respect?
> A easy to set up X windows system. When setting up the display the
> system will automatically get the appropriate server with out the need
> of the user having to chose which one.
We're somewhat constrained here by hardware. We can do this for some
hardware, but I don't know about all hardware. The machine I'm composing
this on won't run the vga16 server, for example (but will run the agx
server, once I've hand-fed it some configuration information).
> Once set up the X desktop should be so nice that users will never
> want to go back to the Windows 95/98 again! KDE sounds really good
> here.
Another problem with the kde window manager is that it doesn't
interoperate well with gnome... Also, I prefer using a different
window manager (either enlightenment or 9wm, depending on context),
or prefer to run without X at all.
> However unlike some other distrubation the OS should not have to use
> X to get the full functionally of the distrubtion. This way it can be
> easially used where the primary point of the machine is a server.
Yep.
> Now does Debian have the same goals?
Some goals are the same.
> If not I might just consider creating a distribution of Debian that
> has these things. Never mind the fact that I have no idea what I am
> doing. But hay, I managed to learn the C++ language with a project for
> a C++ API for MySQL so why not...
Also, because of the DFSG, you are free to derive your distribution from
the debian main distribution. [This would not be true if we incorporated
software with Qt style licenses into debian proper.]
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: