On Thu, 06 May, 1999, Dave Neil wrote: > Ben Pfaff wrote: > > At this point I'm going to reiterate my concern about linking Qt to > > the GPL'd boot floppies code. Don't do it, it's a violation of > > license as far as I can tell. > > > > Bottom line is that Debian has publicly supported QT2's license. If not then > how about clearing this issue up publicly, have you or not? Here is the deal: QT2 licence fits the Debian Free Software Guidelines, so it can be included in Debian. But, it is more restrictive than the GPL, so it can not be linked against GPL code, that means it can not be linked against KDE, dpkg or the Debian boot floppies. It is not really a case of Debian endorsing the QT2 licence, more a case of reading the GPL and QT licences. This is the important section from the GPL: # 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the # Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the # original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to # these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further # restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. # You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to # this License. There is one way out of this hole, call Qt a major component of the operating system. The GPL has a clause that says it can be used with libraries distributed under a more restrictive licence than the GPL, if that library is normally distributed as a major component of the operating system. You could argue if the system is based on KDE then Qt fits this description, but others would disagree. -- I consume, therefore I am
Attachment:
pgpZQo7s6V9oV.pgp
Description: PGP signature