Richard Braakman wrote: > KELEMEN Peter wrote: > > On Sat, 1999-03-27 23:24:31 -0800, Darren O. Benham wrote: > > > > > Legally, you can not distribute GPL software that's been linked to > > > xforms. To include it in Debian, it has to be compiled against fltk. > > > If it won't compile, it has to go the way of KDE. > > > > XWatch is a similar program. [...] > > This is indeed a bug. I've just filed it against xwatch. Thanks > for pointing it out.
Now I know where the xwatch bug report comes from. Here's what I replied to Richard: The program falls under the same conditions as Lyx (also GPL'ed) which is why I didn't persue a license change. After following a related discussion on -devel in October (archive/latest/15697), I concluded that the GPL conflict applies only to software not originally developed under a non-free library (e.g. say the KDE team takes ghostview and write kghostview linked against Qt; that would be against the GPL unless they get permission from the ghostview authors). Since the author initially designed xwatch to work with xforms, I concluded that there was no conflict. The author agreed. I would be happy to clarify the license if you could provide a paragraph to add to it, stating that linking to libforms is allowed. Since you posted the bug report, perhaps you already have in mind a statement that would satisfy you. The upstream author has given me permission to do whatever I felt was required with the package, including changing the license. Any comments from the legal crowd? Any standard add-on XForms packages can add to the GPL? BTW, The Lyx license is _still_ GPL you know... Peter Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>