On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 11:58:04AM +0100, Warwick Allison wrote: > >that this omission will need to be rectified unless the patch clause > >is entirely eliminated [perhaps in favor of a relabelling clause -- > >I see no reason to call a Qt derivative Qt if the API might be different]. > > Relabelling is a problem - we want Linux distributors to be able to > make changes and still call it Qt and libqt.so. Otherwise we create > a mess. It also wouldn't work with the GPL which I was hoping for. It may not be possible, but I'm not giving up trying yet. -- Show me the code or get out of my way.
Attachment:
pgpWCMrBxgMca.pgp
Description: PGP signature