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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: PATCH: Asynchronous filtering
From:       Marc Mutz <mutz () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-10-29 20:00:35
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Wednesday 29 October 2003 19:21, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 October 2003 17:13, Marc Mutz wrote:
<snip>
> > I never touched your code, so that was easy ;-) How would you like
> > it if I messed with kpgp::ui and abstracted it away from kpgp::bg,
> > so the gpgme-based stuff can use it, too?
>
> I guess I would like it.

Good to hear. That makes stuff easier ;-)

> > Yes, and you can only break that dumb requirement if you have good
> > reasons. gpgme is one good reason. gnutls and gsasl are two others
> > (parts of gnutls are GPL, e.g. OpenPGP/TLS support). Putting Kpgp
> > into kdelibs removes one of those reasons. :-)
>
> I guess you know what the problem with GPL'ed code in kdelibs is.

I know that people perceive this as that being the "problem". ;-)

> Companies already prefer gtk over Qt/KDE because gtk doesn't cost a
> dime.

Gnome has the same problem! OOo, Mozilla, etc. are all GTK, but not 
Gnome! So you can't compare KDE to GTK. You have to compare Qt to GTK, 
and there, I only mention Adobe and Opera...

> (At least that's what I've heard.) If we now would force those 
> few companies that chose Qt/KDE not only to pay for Qt but also to
> open their source code because they link to a GPL'ed kdelibs then
> even less companies would choose Qt/KDE. Licensing a library under
> the GPL is nice if you are an idealist and don't care for how many
> companies choose to use your library. But GPL'ing kdelibs is
> currently no option (as much as I regret this).

I'm not talking about GPL'ing kdelibs. kdelibs is many libs. People are 
free to link to one or the other. E.g. kdesasl is a lib of it's own. 
Proprietary vendors would have to use another SASL lib, but then, they 
probably already do, since kdesasl is so limited. And the KIOslaves are 
external processes, so those are also not lost for non-GPL apps.

And a kpgp or kgpgme or whatever would also not be part of kdecore. Apps 
are free to link to that. It isn't core functionality, where I agree 
that, for the time being, LGPL is a must.

I just oppose the no-GPL-in-kdelibs dogma. We can have 
--disable-gpl-code, just as gnutls and libgcrypt have. In the case of 
gnutls, proprietary software vendors would not get OpenPGP/TLS support. 
That's the drawback of freely using the work of uncounted man years of 
KDE developers in a proprietary project ;-)

Marc

-- 
The intensity and complexity of life, attendant upon advancing
civilization, have rendered necessary some retreat from the world, and
man, under the refining influence of culture, has become more
sensitive to publicity, so that solitude and privacy have become more
essential to the individual; but modern enterprise and invention have,
through invasions upon his privacy, subjected him to mental pain and
distress, far greater than could be inflicted by mere bodily injury.
       -- S.D. Warren/L.D. Brandeis:
          The Right to Privacy, Harvard Law Review vol.IV, no.5 (1890)

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail

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