On Sat, Jul 18, 1998 at 03:37:11AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@earthlink.net> wrote: > > The KDE people have implicitly granted the right to use Qt again and > > again. They have not expressly written it, but there's enough evidence > > that they have granted the right implicitly to satisfy the question in > > my mind. > > What does this mean? When all of our communication takes place using > email and the web, how have they managed to grant such permission without > leaving any written trace of it? > > Is this permission, of which we have no explicit record, strong enough > to address Alan Cox's objection? I've seen it somewhere in the form of an email I think which went something like "of course you can link KDE with Qt, it's WRITTEN for Qt!"
Attachment:
pgp7gizwTnsyT.pgp
Description: PGP signature