Re: Your petition to GPL Qt

[Kevin Forge <forgeltd@usa.net>]

Opps -:- My last post used BSDI and Solaris interchangeably.
Just do a search and replace ( Solaris -> BSDI or BSDI -> Solaris :)

Kevin Forge wrote:
> 
> Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >
> > Kevin Forge <forgeltd@usa.net> writes:
> >
> >    john@dhh.gt.org wrote:
> >    >
> >    > In order for QT to qualify as a Debian system library it would have to be a
> >    > 'required' package, and it would drag in X.  No way are we going to bloat
> >    > the system like that.  The 'system library' idea thus fails for purely
> >    > technical reasons.
> >
> >    X is required for a Desktop system. [...]
> >
> > That's simply not true.  I've run machines quite happily on my desktop
> > without ever installing X.
> 
> You didn't read the rest of my post did you ?  The part about Running a
> 1 meg Windows 95 instalation so I can play Quake.  Sure you can do
> without
> it quite hapily.  However it's still considerd a system lib for the sole
> reason that the vendor chooses to call it one.  Take a look at the many
> Solaris installations that don't include X.  Then tell me if there is
> any
> other criteria by which Motif became a system lib on BSDI.
> 
> Here are the parallels so work with me a bit.
> 
> 1 : BSDI didn't write Motif and Debian didn't write QT.
> 
> 2 : BSDI uses Motif by complying with the license from the Open group
>     ( The pay money ).  Debian bundles QT since the QPL will allow that
>     within the DFSG.
> 
> 3 : BSDI is really just distributing a huge bundle of software developed
>     by an OSS/FS community coupled with a few home brewed enhancements.
>     ( Just like Debian ).
> 
> Now when you can get back to me with an explanation of how to make
> Motif a System lib on BSDI and not make QT ( under the QPL ) one
> in Debian or any other Linux distribution that chooses to bundle it
> we can talk farther.  ( Note :- Debian has not decided to bundle it
> yet and will wait to see if the final license is "acceptable" ).