RE: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?

To: 'Martin Schulze' <joey@infodrom.north.de>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: RE: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
From: "Fulgham, Brent/SCO" <BFulgham@CH2M.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 09:45:12 -0600
Message-id: <[🔎] 524299DFAB41D11193EF00805F8598026AA15E@brekka.ch2m.com>

> > But KDE is free software.
> 
> The source is free software.
> 
> The compiled binaries linked against Qt is not free software.
> 

This may just be semantics, but isn't the software "free" if it only
links against the Qt libraries?  We wouldn't be distributing anything
non-free -- users would have to obtain their own Qt libraries if they
wanted to use Qt...

-Brent


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
  - From: Michael Bramer <grisu@debian.org>
- Re: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
  - From: Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>
- Re: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
  - From: "Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk>

Prev by Date: System timer resolution
Next by Date: Stop reporting non-bugs as bugs!
Previous by thread: Betraying our Social Contract (was: Should we ship KDE in hamm?)
Next by thread: Re: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread