On Nov 20, 2007 2:59 PM, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 20, 2007 2:41 PM, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I think in the real world, Kitware can distribute QtDialog under > > CMake's license, and Linux distro gatekeepers won't object. > > I would suggest making clear reference to the exception in the > QtDialog source code. So that (1) some Linux distro ninny doesn't > come along later and erroneously "discover that CMake source is in > non-compliance," and (2) third parties are aware of the additional > obligations they'll have to fulfill if they want to reuse the QtDialog > code.
On second thought, before providing such a notice, it's best to get CMake into that list of license exceptions. http://trolltech.com/products/qt/gplexception Otherwise, CMake would be calling attention to a license condition that, pedantically speaking, it doesn't fulfill. A Linux distro pedant could have a field day with that. I mean, you might not see it as much of a risk, but some people don't have enough to do with themselves. They make noise about things to feel important and promote their religion. It may sound silly, but it's the general tenor of licensing debates, and it's why they snowball. Once those debates get started, truth and fairness aren't what dominate. Just naive first impressions and FUD. In the interest of preventing such a debate from ever happening, it's best not to call attention to anything, until all i's have been dotted and all t's crossed. I imagine Kitware could get some kind of approval / authority / clarity out of Trolltech fairly readily. They may not be willing to redraft their current license just to add CMake into it, but they're probably willing to give Kitware a nice republishable statement that as far as they're concerned, Kitware fulfills the terms of the GPL exception. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake