Re: Becoming a developer
Kenneth Scharf wrote:
>
> >From what I read on this subject, I thought that most
> of the flame war was on KDE, and that it might be
> possible to include KDE IF, they made certain specific
> releases in their license. Since I thought that RMS
> had appoved the newer QT license as a free license
> (does KDE yet use Qt2, which is the new QT license?),
> that this problem was going away.
>
> I admit I am NOT a legal expect on this kind of stuff.
> Is there a way to search the archives on debian-legal
> for QT? Maybe some of my questions will have answers
> there (If one can wade through the flames). Is there
> a way (via license modification disclaimers) that a
> program written using QT can be GPL'ed at all?
> Finally I note that debian DOES have the QTLib in the
> distro, will this remain (allowing users to at least
> use such programs via source)?
This is what I have understood so far, but cannot guarentee corectness:
The free QT liscence with QT2 is a fully valid open source liscence. It
is completely compatible with DFSG. Linking to it with pure GPL code is
not allowed however ( a deficiency with the GPL not the QT liscence) You
could however slightly modify your liscence to allow QT2. There are many
other DFSG free liscences out there that allow QT2, you could use one of
these instead of GPL.
> I don't know if I would attempt to re-write QSSTV to
> replace the QT calls with GTK calls, but that would be
> a last ditch idea.
It truly would, QT is FAR superior to GTK!!!!!!
Cheers,
John
Reply to: