On piątek 04 lipiec 2003 09:41 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 01:16:31AM +0100, John Levon wrote: > > > The problem here is not with the GPL, but with the Troll Tech business > > > model and licensing practices, which puts open source applications > > > under the GPL in this untenable position if developers wish to release > > > Windows versions. > > > > Rubbish. Troll Tech's business model is admirable. They rock in this > > respect. > > I'm interested in hearing an explanation of your perspective on this, John, > because I just don't understand it, and may have misunderstood the > situation. > > As you say below, users on the Windows platform building binaries linked to > the QT non-commercial windows toolkit, and distributing them, will be > breaking the LyX GPL license. > > Is there another option, that doesn't require *unrealistic* local builds?
Yes. Stop the crap and finish the GPL port of Qt/Windows. That's *the* fastest, minimal-fuss way to get all those nice Qt/KDE apps, LyX included, into Windows. There is no other way. Period. People have spent tons of steam pushing all this "TrollTech bad", "GPL bad" etc. stuff around, and it's very unconstructive. Whoever thinks that making a GPL'd Qt port for Windows is unrealistic should look at LyX. AFAICT there's less Windows-specific code in Qt/Windows than overall code in LyX. So it is doable. And given that the design is already there, and all non-platform-specific bits are there too, it is a readily doable task. If you can support my graduate education and modest living, I'd be more than happy to spend a year doing that, and another year ironing the wrinkles out. I guess that many others, more skilled than I am, would readily avail themselves to such an offer. Cheers, Kuba Ober
