Assalamu'alaikum wr. wb. Nah Lo! Quote from http://freshmeat.net/news/2000/06/17/961300740.html > But the license issue remains. Qt is not non-free software. But it's > not GPL compatible either. Some KDE core developers admit this > privately, but won't do so in public because of the implications: > that much of KDE is not legally distributable until they contact > some people that are damned scarce these days and make the necessary > arrangements. > In short, the GPL says that the whole program must be under its > terms before you are allowed to distribute it. It makes a specific > exception for things like proprietary libcs and the like, but the > exception to that is that you can't distribute them both together, > so we'd be stuck even if we considered Qt a system library. > We could distribute the source, but what would be the point in that? > Go get it from KDE; theirs is more current anyway. We also don't see > much point in splitting off those parts of KDE we can legally > distribute because it'd just create version mismatches for people. > There is a bit of a moral aspect, too: KDE weakens the legal force > of the GPL, and many Debian developers (myself included) take at > least some exception to that. Wassallam, -- Zakaria PT. Asia Karsa Indah [EMAIL PROTECTED] Advanced Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jl. Raya Kalimalang 4B, Jakarta [EMAIL PROTECTED] Telp : (62-21) 8649318 http://www.asia-karsa.com Fax : (62-21) 8649316 http://linux.or.id/pemula ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Utk berhenti langganan, kirim email ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Informasi arsip di http://www.linux.or.id/milis.php3 Pengelola dapat dihubungi lewat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
