On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 12:46:22PM +0100, Ruurd Reitsma wrote:
> > I think there are only three clean solutions:
> >
> > (a) Provide detailed instruction how to build LyX/Qt on Windows, but do
> > not distibute prebuild binaries. No need to ask contributors for
> > that.
> >
> > (b) Choose a new licence (like adding a Qt clause) and make all
> > contributors (past and recent) agree on it.
> >
> > (c) Choose a new licence (like adding a Qt clause) and make some
> > contributors (past and recent) agree on it. Cut off those parts
> > of LyX contributed by people who disagree or are not reachable.
> >
> > And I think (a) is the way to go as (b) and (c) are not feasible.
>
> OK! (a) is fine with me. The build instructions are included in my
> patches for 1.3.2.
So try to feed your patches to lyx-devel in small chunks, preferably
'uncontroversial' stuff first.
And maybe some explanation for things like:
Index: src/mathed/math_metricsinfo.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/lyx/lyx-devel/src/mathed/Attic/math_metricsinfo.h,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -r1.16 math_metricsinfo.h
--- src/mathed/math_metricsinfo.h 2002/10/02 06:38:49 1.16
+++ src/mathed/math_metricsinfo.h 2003/05/18 20:44:26
@@ -52,7 +52,8 @@
};
-struct MathPainterInfo {
+class MathPainterInfo {
+ public:
///
MathPainterInfo(Painter & pain);
///
A class with evrything public is a struct after all.
> Does this mean 'cease & desist' for my current distribution channel?
I don't think so. I certainly won't sue anybody distributing LyX/Qt/Win
binaries, it's just that I don't want to do the same.
> Anyway, there's also scenario:
>
> d) Create a Win32 X11 Qt lib from the GPL'ed free edition. Use that for
> development & distribution. Let the user add the 'win32 window system' Qt
> library.
>
> How does that sound?
How do you add some 'win32 window system library' without linking LyX?
I.e. what's the benefit over 'just giving sources and compile
instructions'? (Legally, it sound ok to me...)
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have,
nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
