Harold et al.,
After a brief discussion this morning, Ralf has given me permission
to package QT-2.3.1 and release it to the Cygwin community. I would
like to have it under the XFree86 dir, since it is a fully native X
library. This release has been throughly tested by us over on the
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 05:05:52AM -0700, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
Harold et al.,
After a brief discussion this morning, Ralf has given me permission
to package QT-2.3.1 and release it to the Cygwin community. I would
like to have it under the XFree86 dir, since it is a fully native X
On Thu, 2002-07-25 at 22:45, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Are you sure that we don't get licensing issues here? AFAIK, Qt is
(roughly) only free when running on a free OS. Basically we're
still running on Windows...
http://www.trolltech.com/developer/licensing/
Summary, 2.2 and later is QPL
or
something.
Harold
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Collins
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 8:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ITP]: Qt-2.3.1
On Thu, 2002-07-25 at 22:45, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Are you sure that we
--- Harold Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, remember also that the X11 version is licensed under the GPL,
so it is
fine. They do make some other versions that are not yet licensed
under the
GPL. The native Windows version used to be non-GPL, but I think I
remember
seeing something in
Ralf,
Since KDE on Cygwin might eventually depend on this Qt package, why
don't you guys decide together what the best location would be?
I really have no idea where to put it, so I'm all for just putting it
somewhere and cleaning up the mess later when we learn what we did wrong.
The LSB
--- Harold L Hunt II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ralf,
Since KDE on Cygwin might eventually depend on this Qt package, why
don't you guys decide together what the best location would be?
I really have no idea where to put it, so I'm all for just putting
it
somewhere and cleaning up the
