On Thu, Nov 19, 1998 at 09:29:20AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote: > "J.H.M. Dassen \(Ray\)" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > > Qt becoming DFSG-free does not automatically imply there's no more problem with > > GPL-ed Qt-using code. The question of whether the QPL is compatible with the > > GPL is a separate one. > > Just a matter of wording. If it turns out that QPL isn't compatible > with GPL isn't QPLs fault. QPL allows use of other free licenses GPL > does not. That is the problem with KDE. > > One time GPL - Always _GPL_. > > One time QPL - Always Open Source. If that were the case it'd be no problem since the GPL is an OSS license. However the QPL has to be made available under the same terms as the GPL to satisfy it. Same terms or less, but no more. Problem is, the seperate patches requirement is not going to work with the GPL. Troll Tech MIGHT be willing to change that, we can ask at least. All they can do really is say no they won't change it. -- Show me the code or get out of my way.
Description: PGP signature