Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
J.H.M. Dassen Ray wrote: On Thu, Dec 23, 1999 at 14:00:56 -0500, Brian Servis wrote: The KDE folks had/have no exception and thus were/are violating the GPL. Only if they're reusing other people's GPLed code, which reportedly they don't. Remember, an author isn't bound by the copyright license she puts on her own work, so it's not a case of the KDE project violating the GPL. The violation occurs when others distribute KDE binaries. They certianly were back when KDE was in debian before we realized about the licence conflict (I maintained it). I know they used rxvt sources, probably xcalc sources, and I'm sure others. I suspect they have been getting rid of them in the time since. -- see shy jo
I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
Hi, I just thought of something. I thought the whole reason why KDE wasn't included in the Debian download trees because of the licensing issues with QT. If that's the case, then why is QT included in the download tree?!? If QT is OK to put in there then what's the point of saying KDE can't be there? -- Bart Szyszka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ:4982727 B Grafyx http://www.bgrafyx.com Join AllAdvantage.com and get paid to surf the Web! http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ARD582
Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
*- On 23 Dec, Bart Szyszka wrote about I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!? Hi, I just thought of something. I thought the whole reason why KDE wasn't included in the Debian download trees because of the licensing issues with QT. If that's the case, then why is QT included in the download tree?!? If QT is OK to put in there then what's the point of saying KDE can't be there? QT v1 is included in the non-free section. The problem is that KDE is supposed to be under the GPL but is violating the GPL by linking to QT which is non-free. So Debian and others decided not to include KDE until they either fixed the licensing issues or QT became free. QT v2 is under less restrictive license and thus once KDE is built with the new QT then it will go in main. This is all just my rough interpetation. See http://www.debian.org/News/1998/19981008 for all the details. Brian Servis -- Mechanical Engineering | Never criticize anybody until you Purdue University | have walked a mile in their shoes, [EMAIL PROTECTED] | because by that time you will be a http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis | mile away and have their shoes.
Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
On Thu, Dec 23, 1999 at 12:26:43PM -0500, Bart Szyszka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just thought of something. I thought the whole reason why KDE wasn't included in the Debian download trees because of the licensing issues with QT. If that's the case, then why is QT included in the download tree?!? If QT is OK to put in there then what's the point of saying KDE can't be there? QT is DFSG free, but it is not GPL. The QT license and GPL are not compatible, but the KDE people have mixed GPL and QT licensed code. It is illegal to redistribute this mixed code, and Debian will not do it. The KDE guys shouldn't either, but they don't seem to care. -- Eric Gillespie, Jr. * [EMAIL PROTECTED] All hail the Dollar, King of the Earth. pgppyNZ9npBB1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
Bart Szyszka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just thought of something. I thought the whole reason why KDE wasn't included in the Debian download trees because of the licensing issues with QT. If that's the case, then why is QT included in the download tree?!? If QT is OK to put in there then what's the point of saying KDE can't be there? I believe that Troll Tech has changed their licensing terms since SPI decided not to icnlude KDE in 2.1. -- Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Dueling Modems Computer Forum http://dm.net
Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
QT v1 is included in the non-free section. The problem is that KDE is supposed to be under the GPL but is violating the GPL by linking to QT which is non-free. So Debian and others decided not to include KDE until they either fixed the licensing issues or QT became free. QT v2 is under less restrictive license and thus once KDE is built with the new QT then it will go in main. This is all just my rough interpetation. See this I don't understand. If they're not including KDE because it has a non-free program as a dependency, then what about Licq? In the stable tree, it depends on qt1g: http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/net/licq.html http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/libs/qt1g.html -- Bart Szyszka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ:4982727 B Grafyx http://www.bgrafyx.com Join AllAdvantage.com and get paid to surf the Web! http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ARD582
Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
*- On 23 Dec, Bart Szyszka wrote about Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!? QT v1 is included in the non-free section. The problem is that KDE is supposed to be under the GPL but is violating the GPL by linking to QT which is non-free. So Debian and others decided not to include KDE until they either fixed the licensing issues or QT became free. QT v2 is under less restrictive license and thus once KDE is built with the new QT then it will go in main. This is all just my rough interpetation. See this I don't understand. If they're not including KDE because it has a non-free program as a dependency, then what about Licq? In the stable tree, it depends on qt1g: http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/net/licq.html http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/libs/qt1g.html Licq is in the contrib tree since itself is free but depends on a non-free package. The licq authors have written an exception into their license for use with Qt. This type of exception is allowed under the GPL. The KDE folks had/have no exception and thus were/are violating the GPL. This is one of the solutions that was mentioned in the Debian page in regards to the KDE issues. Brian Servis -- Mechanical Engineering | Never criticize anybody until you Purdue University | have walked a mile in their shoes, [EMAIL PROTECTED] | because by that time you will be a http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis | mile away and have their shoes.
Re: I thought KDE wasn't included because of QT?!?
On Thu, Dec 23, 1999 at 14:00:56 -0500, Brian Servis wrote: The KDE folks had/have no exception and thus were/are violating the GPL. Only if they're reusing other people's GPLed code, which reportedly they don't. Remember, an author isn't bound by the copyright license she puts on her own work, so it's not a case of the KDE project violating the GPL. The violation occurs when others distribute KDE binaries. HTH, Ray -- Cyberspace, a final frontier. These are the voyages of my messages, on a lightspeed mission to explore strange new systems and to boldly go where no data has gone before.
