Re: Qt license okay?
On Fri, Jan 15, 1999 at 02:28:44PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I convinced a friend to release his software under a free
> > license, but he wanted protection in case he later decide to
> > commercialize a version of his software. I suggested the Qt
> > license which was at version 0.92 at the time (and still is).
> The Qt 0.92 license still suffers from the patch clause. While people
> do consider this `free', we also consider it pretty painful (ie, it
> seems to rule out CVS trees, it /does/ rule out forking, and so on).
No it doesn't. Read the annotated version. =>
> Also, because of the patch clause, it isn't GPL compatible. This may
> or may not matter to you -- it will stop you from using GPLed libraries
> like libreadline, but it will also stop people from doing a GPL fork
> (or submitting GPLed patches) which might be what you want.
Because of other things it's not GPL compatible. Still working on that.
"There is infinite time. You are finite. Zathras is finite. This is ..
-- Babylon 5