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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: [freeqt] Re: FreeQt concerns
From:       Matthias Ettrich <ettrich () informatik ! uni-tuebingen ! de>
Date:       1998-04-15 11:12:31
[Download RAW message or body]


[snip]

> 
> For this reason, KDE has little chance of becoming the standard
> desktop for GNU/Linux systems (*).  "FreeQT" does not meet the GNU
> project's definition of free software, or the Debian definition, and
> Red Hat is funding the development of GNOME.
> 
> This consequence results solely from KDE's unfortunate decision to use
> Qt.  KDE may have some technical drawbacks, but so does every other
> program we use; we would probably have accepted them.  If KDE had been
> developed using a free library--even an "inferior" one--then it would
> be capable of use in a free operating system, and it would already be
> the standard desktop.

"Standard" is a matter of usage, not of definition.  Actually I do not care 
what you or RedHat call "standard" or use as long as over 50% of all new 
desktop applications for Unix are based on the kde libraries :)  
The so-called "Standard" on the desktop is called "Microsoft Windows (NT)" btw.
Ever heard of that? _this_ is our competitor, if we have a competitor at all:
our task is mainly to produce something usable and to have fun, not to compete.
But we are definitly not competing against GnuStep, not against a small 
norwegian company and not against apple.

Concerning the role of the GPL you have been right: In fact gcc and the
GPL helped KDE very much, although some of our developers use commercial 
compilers.  With egcs and xemacs we have also modern tools based on the work 
of the FSF, which allow us to continue the development. This is great and the 
FSF deseveres credits for that. But you overlook that KDE is also existing 
thanks to Qt. While you are talking about some kind of poison which 
contaminates a free operation system we are talking about a 
   - technical brilliant application development framework
   - which comes with full source code 
   - which is free of charge for people writing free applications
   - which is developed in an open model: weekly snapshots
   - which is guaranteed to remain free thanks to the KDE/FreeQt foundation. 
   - which can be used to write commercial non-gplŽed software for unix and
     WindowsNT. This is an important point for some of our developers who
     have to feed a family.

So I cannot see very high pressure to work on a GPLed Qt replacement, although
I wish you luck and success with the project. 

btw: There was a mail some days ago which claimed to come from "Richard
Stallman", too. In this mail the author claimed that writing non-GPLed
software is "unethical" and that it was good if people who do so run
into trouble. Was this really you, Richard, or is somebody faking your name to
bring you into disrepute?  Or did I miss the irony (I am not that familiar 
with the american language)? 


Kind regards,

  Matthias
  <ettrich@kde.org>

> 
> (*) See http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html.
> 

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