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


On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 07:45:54AM -0700, Carl B. Constantine wrote:
> On 6/9/2000 15:49, Steve Greenland at stevegr@debian.org wrote:
> > 1. The GPL is not compatible with the QPL - software released under the
> > GPL may not be linked with Qt and then distributed.
> That's in Binary form. What about just distributing the Source (the (L)GPL'd
> part) and leaving it up to the user to compile and link to Qt. I don't see
> this as violating the GPL in any way.

There are some serious problems:

1) Because the only way to get a usable binary from the kde sources is 
linking to QT (whose license is not compatible with the GPL), it is very
possible it is not legal to distribute the sources of the GPL part. 

2) I saw the kde code some time ago and I do not thrust them: KDE was a
complete mess from a license point of view.
I saw used code free for non-commercial use only, code linked to GPL
libraries of the FSF (!), and other.
So if someone package code from the KDE people, it should examine all the
code to find license violations.

3) judging from the reaction of Joseph Carter (which worked very hard to
solve the problem), you cannot expect the necessary collaboration from the
KDE people.

> At this point it seems to me this holy war is more of an emotional thing
> because of past violations and the fact that Debian seems to just hate KDE
> and won't allow it into the distro no way no how.

I do not comment this shit.



Francesco Tapparo				 |	cesco@debian.org
fight for your software freedoms: www.fsf.org    |      tapparo@mat.unimi.it

Reply to: