On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 09:09:01AM -0400, Caitlyn Martin wrote:
> > KDE is released under the GPL, but Qt is not. You can't use KDE
> > without Qt. (It's questionable in my mind whether a GPL product
> > should rely on a third-party library which is not released under
> > the GPL, the LGPL, or an equivalently open license)
>
> I can't disagree with the latter statement, but it no longer applies to KDE.
> When TrollTech changed the license, it met the Open Source definition, at
> least sufficiently to satisy, form what I've read, Eric Raymond and other
> leading figures in the Open Source movement.
>
> You'll correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure :)
You're right here... as long as you're talking about Qt 2.x. All previous
versions are NOT open, and it's these versions that KDE uses. So if you use
KDE-1.x, you've still got the non-open version of the Qt library.
Personally, I dumped Qt1 (never used KDE anyway) and installed the latest
version just so I can use licq 0.71. :)
As a side note, someone (I think kelly) described Qt as a 'dog'. I'm curious
about this... my experiences with Qt have been great -- much easier to write
in than Gtk+. I'm hardly an experienced X programmer, though... perhaps you
can correct me?
--
Aaron Malone ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
System Administrator
Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc.
http://www.semo.net
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
