Re^4: Should we ship KDE in hamm?
Am 23.07.98 schrieb phil # hands.com ...
Moin Philip!
PH> Software without a licence does not count as free software. KDE binaries
That#s right.
PH> currently have no licence (the GPL excludes itself from being used for
PH> these binaries, see section 7). We don't even get to distribute them as
PH> non-free if they have no licence.
Maybe there#s a problem with *some* KDE programs which are using GPL code
from other developers. But it#s no problem for me (as author of a KDE
program) to distribute my code under the GPL. As author I could always
break my own license by using Qt!
PH> close to release to fix the problem. It will be fixed soon enough by
PH> either fixing the copyright, or dropping the binaries. The same goes for
PH> any other GPL software linked against non-free libs (i.e. Motif).
That#s a very bad idea. Should we drop LILO because it uses the commercial
AWARD or AMI BIOS code? I don#t see any difference.
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: