Re^4: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
Am 23.07.98 schrieb joey # infodrom.north.de ...
Moin Martin!
MS> > But KDE is free software.
MS> The source is free software.
MS> The compiled binaries linked against Qt is not free software.
That is wrong. I don#t think that the author breaks the GPL, because he
uses the non-free Qt library. The GPL says that you can use commercial
tools which#re selled with the operating system.
And we could of course say that Qt is a standard library of a Linux
system, because most distributions include it. And if it#s a standard
library there#s no problem with the GPL.
And remember: the author himself could always break the GPL!
MS> The problem is that this is not a matter of 'should' but of 'must'.
Not really. I don#t think that the KDE team breaks the GPL. The problem is
the GPL itself; the GPL is not very clear in several points.
MS> > MDS> I use Debian because it is ALL software Open Source.
MS> > But most users don#t think so!
MS> ... which doesn't count.
I does count. For example I#m interested to build a good distribution and
I like the DFSG, but it#s nonsense to force the our users to use only free
software.
And we should of course develop the distribution for our users.
MS> Please go back and read our Social Contract
MS> at http://www.de.debian.org/social_contract.html.
So what? I don#t have a problem with the social contract. But this doesn#t
mean that I#m not using non-free software.
cu, Marco
--
Uni: Budde@tu-harburg.de Fido: 2:240/5202.15
Mailbox: mbudde@hqsys.antar.com http://www.tu-harburg.de/~semb2204/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: