Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]

To: "Andrew Wansink" <awansink@ke.com.au>
Cc: Debian legal list <debian-legal@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
From: Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@msu.edu>
Date: 27 May 1999 22:08:29 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] 87btf66j4y.fsf@pfaffben.user.msu.edu>
Reply-to: pfaffben@msu.edu
In-reply-to: "Andrew Wansink"'s message of "Fri, 28 May 1999 10:47:35 +1000"
References: <[🔎] 19990528004947.A918@hairnet.demon.co.uk> <[🔎] 199905280040.KAA21986@kestrel.ke.com.au>

"Andrew Wansink" <awansink@ke.com.au> writes:

   Is this a gnome-plot to spread fud against kde?

No.  The QT license, either version, is not compatible with the GPL.
That is a fact.  Facts are not FUD.

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
  - From: "Ivan E. Moore II" <rkrusty@tdyc.com>

References:
- [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
  - From: Edward Betts <edward@debian.org>
- Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
  - From: "Andrew Wansink" <awansink@ke.com.au>

Prev by Date: Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
Next by Date: Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
Previous by thread: Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
Next by thread: Re: [awansink@ke.com.au: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiword illegal?]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread