On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 08:42:21PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Marcus writes:
> > If you (or RMS) write (or say) that it is not GPL compatible, how can you
> > link KDE with it and move the result to main?
>
> The KDE folks also must fix their license and get permissions from the
> authors of GPL
Marcus writes:
> If you (or RMS) write (or say) that it is not GPL compatible, how can you
> link KDE with it and move the result to main?
The KDE folks also must fix their license and get permissions from the
authors of GPL works that they have ported. They are reported to be doing
so.
--
John
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 07:12:44PM -0500, Shaleh wrote:
> >
> >
> > I remember there were some question marks about just how free the QPL
> > licence really was. And questions about whether Debian would accept
> > it as a free license. Now that Qt is finally licenced under it, what
> > is the v
>
>
> I remember there were some question marks about just how free the QPL
> licence really was. And questions about whether Debian would accept
> it as a free license. Now that Qt is finally licenced under it, what
> is the verdict? Is it good enough?
>
it is good enough. RMS is on the bo
4 matches
Mail list logo
