Re: We distribute LyX?
On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Navindra Umanee wrote:
>
> Montreal Sun Jan 24 05:47:21 1999
>
> Peter S Galbraith <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca> wrote:
> > David Starner wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, LyX depends on XForms, so fixing Qt won't help. Fixing Qt will
> > > let us add KLyX (LyX ported to Qt), which would be a good substitute.
> >
> > Has anyone in Debian ever approached the XForms developer(s)
> > about making XForms open-source?
>
> Is Debian a paying customer here? Is it particularly appropriate for
> Debian to approach developers in this way? Isn't this something the
> XForms developers can decide for themselves?
There is no reason why we shouldn't approach them explaining why we think
it would be a good idea. They don't have to agree.
> > That sure would move a _lot_ of stuff into main. I doubt they
> > make much money on it, it's mostly free anyway (as in beer).
>
> Is Debian one to judge?
No. We can suggest though.
>
> > Having sources available would make me feel better about it
> > disappearing off the face of the earth and standing all those
> > applications.
> >
> > Peter <psg@debian.org>
>
> [Debian approaches Microsoft with Open Source (TM) proposal. News at 11.]
Debian has persuaded companies to open source their code before.
And the open source movement is making some progress with both Apple and
Sun considering open sourcing some of their product line.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: