Re: kde/gpl discussion is silly
> I think common sense dictates we stop distributing KDE
> binaries.
if you can find one single author of source in kde, ok.
but unless there is one single person, don't do that.
alan cox has no code in kde (he would have said, woudln't he ?).
> Andreas> no kde author will ever sue anyone for useing qt. that
> Andreas> doesn't make sence.
>
> I don't know that. There are enough people doing crazy things
> to ever depend on this.
rms can sue you because you have an illegal copy of emacs.
or do you have a signed paper from him ? the text file could be faked.
kde people are much less crazy than rms is. they asked us to distribute the
software. in binary. like many other distributions do.
if you don't like kde, ok. i don't do, too.
but this has nothing to do with licence situation.
except some conspiracy theorists nobody ever said that there is a problem with
kde and qt binaries.
> Nope. If they really want us to distribute theor code. they
> can change the licence, or stop using QT.
they will not do this, because there is not a problem with qt. you think
different, so you should go there, and explain them that there is a problem.
an there is realy no problem with gpl/qt : because at law _there_ opinion
as licence giver has the ruleing.
if you say "the licence allows me to ..." and the author sais "no, it does
not", then there might be a problem. but this is not the case.
you say "maybe the licence does not allow ..." and the author sais "it does."
so no need to worry.
the wohle licence situation is baised on trust - we trust people not to sue
us, because they made a public statement (their licence file). there is no
reason to trust anyone except the kde people.
andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: