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

List:       mozilla-general
Subject:    Re: To give you an idea of QtScape code...
From:       robert havoc pennington <hp () pobox ! com>
Date:       1998-04-11 19:32:12
[Download RAW message or body]

garbanzo@hooked.net (Alex) writes:
> 
> It may be comercial, but to me, that makes no difference.  I'm not
> planning on selling Mozilla, and I hope you aren't either.  Then, take a
> look at the clean C++ code that went into converting Moz from Motif to Qt.
> I think the Qt code is much more coherent, which is worth more than the
> GPL is to me any day.
>

That's fine. To others it does. We're all happy. No need to have a flamefest.
Everyone work on their favorite toolkit.

> On Sat, 11 Apr 1998, Edward S. Marshall wrote: 
> > One proprietary scheme is enough for me. I wish the GTK bunch the best
> > of luck in their porting efforts. 
> 
> And GTK isn't proprietary? Hrm.  Where can I find source compat. GTK
> alternatives?  Thought so.
> 

Here you're wrong, because his usage of proprietary is clearly meant
to contrast with "free" or "open source." If your definition of
proprietary is different, that's fine. Given either definition, the
facts are quite clear and indisputable: under his definition, Qt is
the proprietary one; under yours, both are proprietary.

So, lacking factual disagreement, end the thread.

Havoc Pennington
http://pobox.com/~hp

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