Re: Debian KDE philosophy
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 02:55:20PM +0100, Gernot Bauer wrote: What annoyes (sp?) me is that people say Linux needs a nice workspace - and for me, kde is one - and then say, well, kde is nice, but not free and therefore we dont want to distribute it. I dont want to start a flamewar here, maybe somebody could explain technical or legal-reasons to me. Although that's not the reason in this case, I do think that it wouldn't matter how nice a particular piece of software is, it won't become standard with Debian unless it is DFSG-free. (Which is just fine with me, FWIW.) Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
Debian KDE philosophy
As I read in some postings (slashdot.org and several other mailing lists) debian is planning not to distribute KDE (and qt) anymore. Could anyone tell me the reason why kde should not be distributed via the non-free-tree (ftp)... Netscape is available as well (and this is software what I call NONFREE in terms of GPL). What about a kde-installer.deb-package? What annoyes (sp?) me is that people say Linux needs a nice workspace - and for me, kde is one - and then say, well, kde is nice, but not free and therefore we dont want to distribute it. I dont want to start a flamewar here, maybe somebody could explain technical or legal-reasons to me. Thank you, Gernot P.S.: I dont know if this is the right place to ask - if not, maybe we could solve this via email and not via the debian-user-list. And, sorry for my bad english. -- - Wolfgang Gernot Bauer SKWB Schoellerbank Aktiengesellschaft Sterneckstrasse 5, A-5024 Salzburg Tel.: ++43-662-8684-364 Fax.: ++43-662-8684-44364 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian KDE philosophy
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 02:55:20PM +0100, Gernot Bauer wrote: As I read in some postings (slashdot.org and several other mailing lists) debian is planning not to distribute KDE (and qt) anymore. Please read the original announcment as posted on the debian-announce mailing list and the website (http://www.debian.org/News/1998/19981008). There are no plans to stop making Qt available via the Debian FTP sites. Could anyone tell me the reason why kde should not be distributed via the non-free-tree (ftp)... Netscape is available as well (and this is software what I call NONFREE in terms of GPL). The announcment explains why distributing KDE binaries by anyone except the KDE copyright holders is a violation of KDE's license. What about a kde-installer.deb-package? We expect the KDE project to continue to distribute KDE in .deb format from their FTP servers, so an installer package is not necessary. What annoyes (sp?) me is that people say Linux needs a nice workspace - and for me, kde is one - and then say, well, kde is nice, but not free and therefore we dont want to distribute it. I dont want to start a flamewar here, maybe somebody could explain technical or legal-reasons to me. Read the original announcement. This isn't about Debian not wanting to distribute KDE, this is about Debian not being allowed to distribute KDE binaries. Ray -- ART A friend of mine in Tulsa, Okla., when I was about eleven years old. I'd be interested to hear from him. There are so many pseudos around taking his name in vain. - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
Re: Debian KDE philosophy
As I read in some postings (slashdot.org and several other mailing lists) debian is planning not to distribute KDE (and qt) anymore. Could anyone tell me the reason why kde should not be distributed via the non-free-tree (ftp)... Netscape is available as well (and this is software what I call NONFREE in terms of GPL). What about a kde-installer.deb-package? The problem is not that it is not free, but that the licenses it uses conflict. The requirements of the GPL and the Qt-license cannot be applied consistently to KDE with the Qt library, if Debian distributes the binaries. For the KDE code, this could be resolved using a modified version of the GPL. A bigger problem is that the KDE code uses and includes other GPL-ed software, for which the respective copyright holders should give their permission to change the license. What it boils down to is that debian could be sued for distributing KDE binaries with the current licenses. What annoyes (sp?) me is that people say Linux needs a nice workspace - and for me, kde is one - and then say, well, kde is nice, but not free and therefore we dont want to distribute it. I dont want to start a flamewar here, maybe somebody could explain technical or legal-reasons to me. Debian is about creating a free (in the GPL sense) operating system. I fail to see how that can annoy anyone. If you don't care for this, it is OK. But don't flame debian for trying to do just that. There are plenty non-free solutions around to choose from. HTH, Eric -- E.L. Meijer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | tel. office +31 40 2472189 Eindhoven Univ. of Technology | tel. lab. +31 40 2475032 Lab. for Catalysis and Inorg. Chem. (TAK) | tel. fax+31 40 2455054
Re: Debian KDE philosophy
Independently of the KDE issue, there's a question I've wondered about for some time. Has the GPL ever been tested in court (i.e. has there ever been a case that turned on it)? Best wishes, Ted. E-Mail: (Ted Harding) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 09-Oct-98 Time: 15:04:58
Re: Debian KDE philosophy
On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Independently of the KDE issue, there's a question I've wondered about for some time. Has the GPL ever been tested in court (i.e. has there ever been a case that turned on it)? No, I've never heard of that. It's been successfully used to get people to release code though: NeXT, for example, had to be forced into releasing their gcc modifications. So apparently some high-priced lawyers didn't think they'd win in court. It was also written with the aid of lawyers, unlike many free licenses. So it's probably safe to say that at least the core parts of it would hold up in court. Havoc
