[Note: I am moving this to debian-legal, where it belongs.] Dave Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At this point I'm going to reiterate my concern about linking Qt to > the GPL'd boot floppies code. Don't do it, it's a violation of > license as far as I can tell. > Bottom line is that Debian has publicly supported QT2's license. If not then how about clearing this issue up publicly, have you or not? The conclusion that we came to, I believe, is that Qt 2.0 is DFSG-free (Open Source). That doesn't mean that it's GPL compatible (it's not, IIRC)), which is a separate issue. Please read the debian-legal archives for more information. You can find them at http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/ The most relevant months are Nov and Dec 1998. There may also be some relevant messages in the debian-devel archive. I am not trying to say that Qt is a bad library or that its licensing is bad in some way, BTW. But its license is not compatible with the GPL. -- "It takes a certain amount of shamelessness to be a monomaniac billionaire dwarf." --Jon Katz <URL:http://slashdot.org/articles/99/03/17/1634238.shtml>