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

Re: Not only KDE

Greg Stark <gsstark@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> Basically, this situation is not a problem if the authors are willing to grant
> permission to distribute their program. The problem with KDE is that the
> authors are allegedly unwilling to fix the license to allow such.

It's more complicated than that.  The KDE authors allegedly are willing to
add to the license, but they only wrote a fraction of KDE.  Even if the
KDE authors manage to convince all the other authors of free software
on which they've based KDE to accept this special license provision,
it's likely to take a long time (years?) sorting this out.  

Currently, we don't even have an all-inclusive list of the bits of
included code which are problematic.

> Well, that and the fact that the Qt license could be interpretted to
> disallow it because it says the program must be distributed under the
> GPL, not the GPL plus special exceptions.

It's really too bad that Qt has such a crazy license.


Reply to: