[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Can we pull KDE?

Vincent Renardias wrote:

> This still wouldn't give us the right to distribute some binaries which
> include GPL code not coded by the KDE team. (Their ghostscript-based
> Postscript viewer just to name one)

I don't think that what S.u.S.E. does or does not put on their CDs has
any direct implications for us, anyhow. I'm certainly not suggesting
that we should include Qt as part of main, since it is patently

Anyway, right now we distribute KDE under a non-written license (from
the KDE people) that says `GPL, but OK to distribute linked to Qt',
which is something that the KDE people aren't entitled to decree for the
GPL code that they didn't write. This is a problem.

As far as S.u.S.E. etc. are concerned, this particular problem does not
seem to exist. Since in their set-up Qt is covered by the
comes-with-the-OS exception of the GPL, they don't need special
permission from the KDE folks to distribute any of KDE (as we do),
because they can use the vanilla GPL. Of course this means that nobody
needs to change or violate the license of any third-party GPL bits and
pieces that KDE includes, since the net result is still purely GPL from
their point of view. It looks to me as if they were home and dry.

Anselm Lingnau ......................... lingnau@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
This is what in computer science we call a kludge.            -- Jeff Weinstein

Reply to: