Re: packages linked against Qt
On Sun, 16 Jul 2000, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 15, 2000 at 10:13:44AM -0400, Steve Robbins wrote:
> > I don't understand the point you are making.
> > If your intent is to flame someone, why could you not do it in private
> > email? Do you suppose the rest of debian-devel is concerned with your
> > view of this person?
[ ... ]
> As for the flame, if you'd spend a few moments reading the last week's
> traffic on debian-legal it will all the sudden make perfect sense.
Ah, you write for omniscient readers!
> > I have read the GPL thoroughly, I have read the DFSG, and I have read many
> > accounts of the KDE/GPL controversy. With all that, I cannot figure out
> > what you are alluding to. Rather than insult my intelligence, why not
> > simply remind us all, with a few pithy words, why you doubt Tomasz' view
> > of TrollTech's motives?
> Troll Tech's motives aren't the problem. I'm not totally sure I trust
> those myself.
OK, here was my confusion. I did not guess which of Tomasz' statements
you took exception to. I do not read debian-legal.
> Tomasz has already claimed that having a GIF file in a GPL'd package is
> illegal under the GPL [ ... ]
> Now fresh out of that discussion, he starts spouting off utter bullshit
> such as the QPL is not a free license (why the hell is it in main then?)
[ ... ]
> Some of us are unwilling to tollerate FUD coming from "our side" of this
> issue making it harder to resolve.
I just wanted to point out that there was no way for many of us to glean
any information from your post.
And thank you for clearing this up.