Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Jul 2005 14:00 UTC, submitted by Timothy R. Butler
GNU, GPL, Open Source Tim Butler knew when he mentioned something negative about the GNU Project's General Public License (GPL), in his column on KDE last week, he would inevitably be accused of arguing the GPL was a bad license. What did not fit into that piece shall now be dealt with: is the GPL a bad license or is the issue he complained about something else?
Permalink for comment 3789
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Morty
Member since:
2005-07-06

So you come pulling the bindings card, well good for you. Since GTK+ is written in C, in some magical way it gets bindings for everything. That's pure nonsens. And if you look closer, they are not particularly up to date either. Where are the stable Gnome bindings for Python?

And you telling lies about the Qt/KDE bindings does not really make your argument any better. For example the Java bindings for Qt/KDE are very much up to date. They get updated before each release, and have been so since KDE 2.2 or so. For the higher level language it's even better in the Qt/KDE world, the Python, Perl and Ruby bindings are all kept up to date. And the documentation for Python are more than adequate, since the bindings are made to match the C++ equivalent. Since both Python and C++ are OO languages it's a nobrainer.

Funny thing really! People claiming Qt/KDE not being suitable for binding to other languages, since it's C++. And still Qt/KDE have bindings with higher coverage of the toolkits functionality and are kept more up to date.

Reply Parent Score: 1