[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Brokering between developers and paying customers
From:       David Faure <faure () kde ! org>
Date:       2005-06-22 8:49:07
Message-ID: 200506221049.07475.faure () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 20 June 2005 17:48, Jan de Visser wrote:
> On Monday 20 June 2005 09:57, Richard Dale wrote:
> > > I would think this is more about in-house applications. If they're not
> > > distributed, they can be GPLed.
> >
> > A lot of in-house applications don't qualify as GPL'd because you might
> > need to share some code with another company to integrate your two systems.
> > Or if a contractor uses Qt, they are another company which counts as
> > distribution under the terms of the GPL. Many companies wouldn't be happy
> > with the GPL for in-house development for reasons like that.
> 
> Just out of curiosity: How does that work out for the people who work for 
> Klaralvdalens and the other places that do e.g. proko development? I guess 
> they get paid, so that would be commercial? Or are there other arrangements 
> made?

We are paid for GPL development. That's "commercial" if you want,
but it's not "proprietary" software, which is the important thing about the terms
of the GPL. And it's definitely not "in-house" development, since you can see
the results in KDE's SVN.
The word "commercial" is often used in the wrong sense (where people really
mean "proprietary").

-- 
David Faure, faure@kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]