Has it been verified that lyx can't be linked against fltk?
On 10-Oct-98 Craig Sanders wrote: > On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, John Lapeyre wrote: > >> Lyx is currently in contrib. >> Lyx is licensed under the GPL (version 2) . It is dynamically >> linked against a non-free library (libforms) . >> According to the GPL and our interpretation of it in the KDE >> statement, this means we should not be distributing (binaries at least) of >> Lyx. For instance, these binaries use .h files from libforms. >> Unlike KDE, it may be all original code, so that a single change >> of license from the developers will do. >> >> Am I missing something ? > > nope. sounds right to me (but i haven't looked at the licenses > concerned, just going from memory of libxforms being no-source and > non-free). > > imo, we should grant Lyx the same courtesy we did KDE. send them a > request to change their license, and give them some time (say a few weeks > rather than the months that KDE got) to change. if they ignore the > request or choose not to change their license then we have to yank the > software. > > craig > > -- > craig sanders > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ========================================================================= * http://benham.net/index.html <>< * * -------------------- * -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- ---------------* * Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 * * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++* * * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- * * Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ * * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ * * -------------------- * ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------* =========================================================================