William Burrow wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> > Yes. However, we still might look askance at Qt due to the other licensing
> > terms, which are more restrictive than the GPL, especially since V (another
> > C++ GUI) is under the GPL.
> >
> > Please understand I'm not making a technical criticisim. I just wish they
> > would GPL the darned thing and leave it at that.
>
> While the Qt authors may have different concerns than Knuth does over
> TeX, the idea may be the same: modified versions may reflect badly on
> Troll Tech.
This is not the point. They can release it under any
license as long as they allow other people to release
modified versions, even if it has to be under a
different name. This is so that the applications
won't get caught when Troll stops releasing free Qt
versions.
Think of what would happen if you weren't allowed to
release modified versions of X and that company which
has taken over X decided to make X non-free.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 1.1 is out! { http://www.debian.org/ }
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
{ http://greathan.apana.org.au/~herbert/ }
PGP Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or any other key sites
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
