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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: RMS,Debian and KDE
From:       Steve Hutton <shutton () mediaone ! net>
Date:       2000-06-20 4:45:06
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> >%_On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 09:06:43PM -0400, Steve Hutton wrote:
> > Ah, so if someone did a code audit and identified the packages that contain
> > such code, and then simply *excluded* those packages from being in Debian,
> > Debian would be able to ship the majority of KDE under terms which even 
> > RMS would consider legal.
> > 
> > Of course, it takes someone who believes in RMS's legal interpretation 
> > and who wants to see KDE in Debian to make this happen.  If such a person
> > existed (and I have my doubts), that person would logically start by including
> > kdelibs (which has no licensing contentions), then auditing and
> > including/excluding GPL'd packages in kdebase, etc.
> > 
> > If no such person exists, and TrollTech won't change the QPL the way you
> > would like, and all the KDE developers can't agree to change the license
> > for their individual bits of code, and Debian's legal interpretation doesn't
> > change, there will be no KDE in Debian.  Hmmm...so what's the big deal again?
> 
> What's the goal?

My question exactly.  If the goal is to include KDE in Debian, a single
dedicated individual could do the work (or at least part of it) as I described. 
If such an individual existed, I would have thought the kdelibs would be
included right now.

I am starting to wonder if the goal is really to "make all KDE developers
change their license" or "make TrollTech change their license."

Steve

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