Re: [freeqt] Re: FreeQt concerns

[Kevin Forge <forgeltd@usa.net>]

Joel Dillon wrote:
> 
> > A simple solution that has been copied to the appropriate newsgroups.
> > I.e.  freeqt@modeemi.cs.tut.fi & kde-licensing@lists.netcentral.net
> > It just looks too easy :(
> > There is not necessarily a problem with this but I for 1 would try
> > to look out for Troll Tech's bottom line since this needs not
> > affect Linux in any way.
> 
>   We could promise never to port Harmony to Windows. Most of Troll's
> profits are from their /cross-platform/ work; their apps will work
> on both Windows and X. We could best ensure this by putting more
> X-specific stuff in Harmony. And in any case I don't like the idea
> of KDE apps working on Windows; better to have them working only
> on Linux to induce more people to go for dual-boot boxes ;)
>
"A Promise is a comfort to a fool".  Remember this all started because
The FSF and a large chunk of the Linux crew doesn't believe the QT 
License will remain unchanged.  Therefore troll Tech would have no
reason
to trust us.  Putting Harmony / FreeQT under the GPL would mean that 
it's a hard fact.  Is the GPL restrictive enough or should it
specifically
state that "These Libs may not be used to none GPLd Software" ?
>
> > 2 : If a company that uses Linux found KDE a generally beneficial
> >   GUI They may standardize on KDE for all PCs and replace part of
> >   "Explorer" ( The Win32 shell ) with KDE.  Since this is EXTREMELY
> 
>   Not possible, at the moment, as far as I'm aware. Replacing that shell
> ain't easy ;)
> 
Yeah, and besides; If it were possible to build a bulletproof OS
underneath
an Explorer shell lots of people would use it.
>         Jo

-- 
A computer without Windows 95 and Internet Explorer is likea piece of
chocolate cake without Catsup and Mustard.