Re: Isn't a kde version of abiw
On Sat, May 29, 1999 at 04:44:45PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Riku Voipio writes:
> > The border is drawn in the water. I know, both are under GPL, but GPL
> > mention's kernel and compiler as examples of software falling uder system
> > category.
> The border is drawn on common sense. The kernel is clearly a major system
> component in Linux. Qt clearly is not.
Last time border was essential flag, this time it is common sense? For the
coming abiword/kde and kde itself, QT is a mayor component, as rely extremely
> > No, but any QT app, would get QT via depencies, so QT would distributed
> > normally by the system, right?
Please give me arguments before making a ruling.
This discussion is anyway pointless, as we cannot distribute QT and
GPL'd software using QT at same time... So to fix the situation we need
to convince authors using QT to use any other licence than Plain GPL.
I guess an explict permission to link and distribute the software with
QTv2 would be enough. Even in that case, they can't use any existing GPL
code done by others.
Riku Voipio | email@example.com |
Poutamäentie 15 B 78 | +358 50 3313498 --+--
00360 Helsinki | |
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. |