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

Re: Qt Freed!

rjk@greenend.org.uk writes:
> "Jules Bean" <jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk> writes:

>> Since the consensus here is that it *is* DFSG compliance, would you
>> like to point as at the conflict?
> QPL clause

I mean clause 3 - oops l-)

> requires that derived works be distributed as patches (which is
> allowed but discouraged by DFSG clause 4) with the patches under a
> particular license (QPL clause 3b).
> DFSG clause 3 requires that derived works may be distributed under the
> same license as the original work.  You can't do this with a modified
> QPL-licensed work as it would break QPL cause 3b.


Reply to: