Re: korganizer debian package (OT: licence interpretation)

[Martin Schulze <joey@finlandia.Infodrom.North.DE>]

Russell Coker wrote:
> >I have one question to that - in what way does distributing a
> >binary suddenly resolve a licence conflict?  According to the GPL,
> >GPL'd code can not be linked to QT; _only_ the author of a given piece
> >of code has the right to make an exception to that rule.  Because the
> >original in many cases was not written for QT, no such exception is
> >present.
> 
> I believe that what Moritz is saying is that the main KDE packages
> (kdesupport, kdelibs, kdebase, kdenetwork, and koffice) are all quite legal
> because the authors expressly wrote them for use with QT.  The only issue is

Is this written down in the license?  If they're released with plain GPL
and without this important notice - which Debian has requested several
times - we can't distribute them.

> I've started making Debian packages of the development releases of the base
> KDE packages.  Is there anyone who's got some space on a fast FTP server
> where I can store them?

Please contact coolo@{debian,kde}.org.  He has shown interest in keeping
maintenance of .deb files for KDE and putting them on ftp.kde.org.

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
There are lies, statistics and benchmarks.