>From the article I have read about debian Stand On KDE, which said that
debian would like to help kde get there license issues resolved so kde could
be put into debian. Perhaps, that was not the case, and debian just wanted
to kick kde because you guys don't like it and the license issue was just
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:51:23PM -0300, Ben Woodhead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> If I was wrong, I would have expected to see some news on the homepage
> saying "Yeah, KDEs is completely GPLed and will be included in debian", or
> at least something like that. After all the reading I
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:51:23PM -0300, Ben Woodhead wrote:
> >From the article I have read about debian Stand On KDE, which said that
> debian would like to help kde get there license issues resolved so kde could
> be put into debian. Perhaps, that was not the case, and debian just wanted
> to k
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:51:23PM -0300, Ben Woodhead wrote:
> If I was wrong, I would have expected to see some news on the homepage
> saying "Yeah, KDEs is completely GPLed and will be included in debian", or
> at least something like that. After all the reading I did where debian was
> saying t
Hello everybody
First I would like to give my appologies, I was not aware of the incomming
directory and I have been told that kde will be included. I would also like
to say that I personally do not use kde nor am a developer for them, my
consern was with the conflicts between linux. Competition i
Hi,
as Maintainer of KDE for Debian I'd like to chime in. kdelibs, kdesupport,
and kdoc all are sitting in incoming. We had to wait till yesterday for qt2.2
to come out so that I could build it, then compile kde against it since
the GPL'd status doesn't mean squat if you build against the ol
"Ivan E. Moore II" wrote:
> as Maintainer of KDE for Debian I'd like to chime in.
[clip]
> I was interviewed by a few online
> magswhether any of that went anywhere is not my problem.
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/2281/1/
Editor'
On Thu, 07 Sep 2000, Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
>as Maintainer of KDE for Debian I'd like to chime in. kdelibs, kdesupport,
>and kdoc all are sitting in incoming. We had to wait till yesterday for qt2.2
>to come out so that I could build it, then compile kde against it since
>the GPL'd status do
> I would be happy to take over korganizer again for starters (from the status
> information of the package on the tdyc site I believe that no-one else has
> more interest in it than me).
>
> Ivan, if you're managing the KDE Debianizing stuff then perhaps you could
> assign 2 or 3 other significan
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:19:06PM -0300, Ben Woodhead wrote:
> First I would like to give my appologies, I was not aware of the incomming
> directory and I have been told that kde will be included. I would also like
> to say that I personally do not use kde nor am a developer for them, my
> conser
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Fortunately, my part of it is done - KDE is being uploaded to Debian
> now to join Qt in main. Unfortunately, not by any action of KDE. Troll
> Tech made the decision. KDE and Debian both benefit. I can speak
> for a sizable portion o
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Richard's comment was apparently on the order of "It's about time", which
> apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they needed to flame
> him publicly over it.. *sigh*
>
It was not the harmless "about time" part those
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:01:37AM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> > Richard's comment was apparently on the order of "It's about time",
> > which apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they
> > needed to flame him publicl
On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Paul Seelig wrote:
> >
> about. They IMHO righfully complained about RMS' "forgiving" talk
> which is more like religious speech from a church or something.
> If the catholic pope would utter such words it could be silently
> ignored, though it would be appropriate speech in
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:29:37AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Paul Seelig wrote:
>
> > RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this
> > condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be
>
> So now _you_ are telling someone to ask for fo
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 08:24:30PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
[ just more of the same ]
> because of the long and bitter public debates, RMS had to say something
> and he had to make a public statement that it was now OK for KDE to use
> any FSF owned code. if he had just ignored the fact that t
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:01:37AM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote:
> > Richard's comment was apparently on the order of "It's about time", which
> > apparently managed to peeve the KDE people who felt they needed to flame
> > him publicly over it.. *sigh*
> >
> It was not the harmless "about time" par
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote:
> Without being a KDE/Qt user myself, this is what makes me understand
> the anger of the KDE developers.
The problem with that is that the KDE developers have chosen to assume
that because Richard has been an ass to them (and quite clea
On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Joseph Carter wrote:
> IMO, this makes him as dangerous
> as Eric Raymond.
OTOH, Eric Raymond owns guns and is fanatic about it :-)
Paul Slootman
--
home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wurtel.demon.nl/
work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.murphy
Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite
> insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by
> using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as consequence
> of complaints was asked to beg for being
At 10:14 AM 9/8/00 -0400, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But RMS speaking like *this* is rather unappropriate and IMHO quite
> insulting. I wonder if the author of ncftp who was hurting the GPL by
> using readline and who subsequently put ncftp under GPL as co
You are picking at little details of my words, reading into them a
hostility which is not there. Meanwhile, you don't seem to be
concerned about the mob of people who are attacking me.
To me that says "injustice" and "double standard". Injustice, because
you blame me for meanings that others pro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Stallman) writes:
> > Meanwhile, you don't seem to be concerned about the mob of people
> > who are attacking me.
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:06:53PM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote:
> I may now be even more concerned that you seem to consider the authors
> of free KDE software
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:20:01PM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote:
> I think you ought to apologize, for supporting this mob. I have
> no reason to apologize for being its victim.
I, on behalf of everyone involved in the GPL KDE fiasco, humbly apologize to
everyone else for the actions, comitted b
Paul Seelig wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:29:37AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > On Fri 08 Sep 2000, Paul Seelig wrote:
> >
> > > RMS should IMHO publically apologize with the KDE people for this
> > > condescending part of his otherwise correct article. He should be
> >
> > So now _you_
25 matches
Mail list logo
