Re: kde/gpl discussion is silly
Hi,
>>"Martin" == Martin Schulze <joey@kuolema.Infodrom.North.DE> writes:
Martin> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Actually, I say that the GPL allows me to change anything that is
>> part of the sources, which indeed includes a subset of QT, so I
>> say I have a right to modify a subset of QT. This is not a
>> problem, you think?
Martin> This is a point that I don't understand. Qt is not part of
Martin> the KDE source. Qt comes with different packages. Qt has a
Martin> different license. So why shouldn't I realize/recognize
Martin> this?
Oh, sure, Qt does come under a different license. However, KDE
is under the GPL, and all the sources, including config scripts and
make files and interface definitions (header files) are also under
the GPL. If KDE uses QT header files, then that subset of QT falls
under GPL, if the binaries are so distributed. Not all of QT, merely
the subset of QT required to build the binaries. (The only exceptions
are system headers; and under no stretch of imagination Motif or QT
can be called parts of the system for Linux). Therein lies the
problem. We can distribute the sources as we wish. Not the binaries.
manoj
--
Suppose for a moment that the automobile industry had developed at
the same rate as computers and over the same period: how much cheaper
and more efficient would the current models be? If you have not
already heard the analogy, the answer is shattering. Today you would
be able to buy a Rolls-Royce for $2.75, it would do three million
miles to the gallon, and it would deliver enough power to drive the
Queen Elizabeth II. And if you were interested in miniaturization,
you could place half a dozen of them on a pinhead. Christopher Evans
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <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, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: