From kde-licensing Thu Aug 24 00:48:53 2000 From: Joseph Carter Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:48:53 +0000 To: kde-licensing Subject: Re: QT Designer _NOT_ under QPL. X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-licensing&m=96707901302982 On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 09:38:49AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote: > > > Where do they define `package' as all binaries that can be > > > generated by the source? I don't see it. > > > > I do. > > > > Sucks too because this may well end Qt's life in Debian if there are no > > changes to the current QPL. I hate to say it, but it looks like he's > > right though. > > For the record, after re-reading the QPL, Joseph says he now > agrees with me. But, as mosfet says, the licesnse is about the > change so it doesn't matter. Correct, I was mistaken on that point. I bother to answer this for two reasons. First is that I generally prefer to speak for myself thanks. No disrespect Peter but I disagree with you on a number of other issues and I would rather not like to get opinions mixed up any more than already happens. The other reason (and why this really may not matter) comes down to either a transient mail problem or someone in KDE acting in very bad faith. My last several messages to this list have been rejected and returned 552: Message blocked. Now that I have seen another message come through safely I can determine one of two things: 1. the problem is fixed 2. the problem isn't a problem, but rather a deliberate action taken to silence a critic who can demonstrate clear wrongdoing in past actions taken by the project, which that same project would rather have swept under the rug for all time. I guess we'll know which when this message is either delivered to the list or is bounced. -- Joseph Carter GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3 Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 C'mere, come smell the door. -- Tracey Luke (you'd have to have been there)