In article <pan.2006.07.16.17.18.23.147268@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kier wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 16:31:04 +0000, Tim Smith wrote:
>> In article <7769917.IamVhGWV0k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> thread if you wish. I doubt he'll be making such comments ever again,
>>> having witnessed the reaction. GNOME is addressing what KDE lacks in
>>> terms of licensing (the whole Trolltech's Qt situation), so it's very
>>> important.
>>
>> There is no Trolltech Qt licensing situation to address.
>
> There used to be, though, didn't there? That's why Gnome came into being
> in the first place.
Some people thought there was. That was one of the reasons for GNOME.
However, the Qt license changed long ago, so to say that GNOME *is*
addressing a Qt licensing problem is just plain wrong.
(And actually, there wasn't a problem in the first place. Just another case
of people not understanding the GPL. In this case, the part about
major components of the operating system).
--
--Tim Smith
|
|
