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

To: "Fulgham, Brent/SCO" <BFulgham@CH2M.com>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
From: Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 22:28:55 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 24736.901229335@hands.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 23 Jul 1998 15:03:17 MDT." <[🔎] 524299DFAB41D11193EF00805F8598027FEBE1@brekka.ch2m.com>

"Fulgham, Brent/SCO" <BFulgham@CH2M.com> wrote:
> Are we saying that KDE just can't be GPL, but it CAN be Debian-Free?

That's exactly what we're saying.

They were not concentrating when they chose their licence.

They were also not concentrating when that started using other peoples GPL 
code, and were sloppy about the copyright atributions, but that's another 
issue.

Cheers, Phil.


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

Reply to:

References:
- RE: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
  - From: "Fulgham, Brent/SCO" <BFulgham@CH2M.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Status of KDE/Qt - interim decision
Next by Date: No root-compromising security holes
Previous by thread: Re: Re^2: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
Next by thread: Vendor question
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread