Re: [email@example.com: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
Is this a gnome-plot to spread fud against kde?
> > From: "Andrew Wansink" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > I am also not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure I'm not going to be sued
> > by anyone so I don't care too much for licenses. I believe that a qt
> > port of abiword is within the 'spirit' of the gnu license.
> This isn't an uncommon feeling among open source developers, and certainly
> among users. IMO, it's pretty reasonable if you're writing something to
> scratch your own personal itch. However, Mr. Wansink should be aware that
> such license incompatibility can make it difficult for others to
> contribute to the program or to distribute the program.
> On the other hand, as long as there's a version available that does NOT
> link against the qt libraries, then that version is usable by anyone, and
> the kde license restrictions (or the GPL restrictions, depending on your
> viewpoint) hurt only the kde port.
> On the gripping hand, if the owner of the copyright for abiword (which may
> not be a well-defined entity if significant contributions have been made
> by multiple people under GPL) chooses to link against restricted libs,
> that's fine and dandy, as permission to do so is granted, by definition,
> to oneself. This hybrid can't go in Debian (unless its released under a
> different license than GPL), but nobody has broken any laws.
> Mark Rafn email@example.com <http://www.halcyon.com/dagon/> !G