Re: GPL link against non-free in original work (Re: Isn't a kde version..)

[Peter S Galbraith <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca>]

Richard Braakman wrote:

> Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > I'd like to change the license (currently GPL) like this:
> > 

> >                                Additionally, you are granted permission to
> >     assume, for the purposes of distributing this program in object code or
> >     executable form under Section 3 of the GNU General Public License, that
> >     the XForms library (Copyright (c) by T.C. Zhao and Mark Overmars)
> >     is normally distributed with the major components of the
> >     operating system on which the executable or object code runs.
> 
> That won't work.  The additional permission granted doesn't help us,
> since we also distribute Qt itself. 

1- read the rest of the email and you'll notice the further
change to:

 You may, at your option and for the purposes of distributing this
 program in object code or executable form under Section 3 of the GNU
 General Public License, assume that the xforms library (Copyright (c)
 by T.C. Zhao and Mark Overmars) is normally distributed with the major
 components of the operating system on which the executable or object
 code runs. If you choose not to excercise this option, you may
 distribute this software only under the terms of the GNU General
 Public License and may remove this paragraph.

2- We're talking about XForms and not about Qt.

> This is still incomplete, since you don't specify *which* Qt library.
> The one distributed by Troll Tech?  That's rather limiting, and I'd
> consider the resulting program non-free, since for example we wouldn't
> be able to link it with a Qt that was modified to fix bugs.  If you allow
> more, how much more?  This could easily open up a loophole in the GPL.
> Perhaps you'd be better off with the MIT license in the first place.

1- Specifying _which_ XForms was suggested by Brian (as was the
   entire added paragraph), and I wished you had bought up this
   _valid_ objection when we discussed this a few months back.

2- For now, There are no modified versions of XForms anyway.  I
   agree that this license would be incompatible with future
   forks of xforms which were not Copyright (c) by T.C. Zhao and
   Mark Overmars or GPL'ed, so if Zhao and Overmars ever release
   XForms under anything else but GPL I'd be in trouble (if they
   ever release it).  Perhaps replace the sentence with something
   along the lines of linking with XForm or any of its
   descendents is okay?

Thanks Richard

Peter