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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: Gimp, Gnome, Gtk, KDE, Qt...
From:       "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBl?= Duval" <duval () criuc ! unicaen ! fr>
Date:       1998-07-15 12:34:41
[Download RAW message or body]

Alan Cox wrote:

> > Besides, the GPL has a similar restriction:  You can't redistribute
> > anything without the source code, and without it also being GPL'ed.  Both
> > licenses have strict redistribution limitations, terms, and conditions.
>
> Gtk is LGPL for various reasons - this being the big one. So right now
> its thousands of dollars 'troll tax' to write a KDE commercial app or
> to make a commercial version of something you wrote freeware as a student
> and $0 to do so with Gtk.

I really don't see where the problem is : yes, you have to buy a $1,290 if you
want to SELL a program using Qt. That's ok in my opinion.

On the other hand, the Qt Free Edition License allows you to develop so 'Open
Source' software  without buying anything to Troll Tech.

Anyway, if you think Qt is good for you, use it. If you don't think so, use
another toolkit...

And :

"
    My opinion on licenses is that "he who writes the code gets to chose his
    license, and nobody else gets to complain". Anybody complaining about a
    copyright license is a whiner.

    The anti-KDE people are free to write their own code, but they don't have
    the moral right to complain about other people writing other code. I
    despise people who do complain, and I won't be sucked into the argument.
    But feel free to forward this as you see fit.

                Linus

"

A+, Gaël.

--
 ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Gael DUVAL - Reseaux & Applications documentaires   //
/ LINUX, LINUX, LINUX                                ///
 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////

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