Re: Becoming a developer
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 11:32:42AM +0000, John Travers wrote:
> 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)
wrong, it's a deficiency with the Qt license.
the clause in the GPL which it conflicts with is there quite
deliberately - its purpose is to prevent GPL-ed code being stolen
through sneaky maneuvers with shared libraries.
> You could however slightly modify your liscence to allow QT2.
correct. the copyright owner(s) can license their software however they
like - they can give an explicit permission to link their GPL-ed code
with Qt.
> There are many other DFSG free liscences out there that allow QT2, you
> could use one of these instead of GPL.
the trouble with that is that the GPL offers the best protection (for
developers and users) of all the free software licenses. IMO it is a
mistake to encourage the use of other licenses.
> > 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!!!!!!
if you only want to work in C++, and if you don't care that it's
incompatible with the GPL.
craig
--
craig sanders
Reply to: