[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Intent to package xmemos

Richard Braakman wrote:

> KELEMEN Peter wrote:
> > On Sat, 1999-03-27 23:24:31 -0800, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> > 
> > > Legally, you can not distribute GPL software that's been linked to
> > > xforms.  To include it in Debian, it has to be compiled against fltk.
> > > If it won't compile, it has to go the way of KDE.
> > 
> > XWatch is a similar program.  [...]
> This is indeed a bug.  I've just filed it against xwatch.  Thanks
> for pointing it out.

Now I know where the xwatch bug report comes from.  Here's what I
replied to Richard:

 The program falls under the same conditions as Lyx (also GPL'ed)
 which is why I didn't persue a license change.  After following a
 related discussion on -devel in October (archive/latest/15697), I
 concluded that the GPL conflict applies only to software not
 originally developed under a non-free library (e.g. say the KDE
 team takes ghostview and write kghostview linked against Qt; that
 would be against the GPL unless they get permission from the
 ghostview authors).  Since the author initially designed xwatch
 to work with xforms, I concluded that there was no conflict.  The
 author agreed.
 I would be happy to clarify the license if you could provide a
 paragraph to add to it, stating that linking to libforms is
 allowed.  Since you posted the bug report, perhaps you already
 have in mind a statement that would satisfy you.  The upstream
 author has given me permission to do whatever I felt was
 required with the package, including changing the license.

Any comments from the legal crowd?  Any standard add-on XForms
packages can add to the GPL?  BTW, The Lyx license is _still_ GPL
you know...

Peter Galbraith <psg@debian.org>

Reply to: