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?
Thread beginning with comment 3913
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Read the article
by Morty on Wed 13th Jul 2005 22:46 UTC
Morty
Member since:
2005-07-06

Stop spreading lies, you can use any open source license you want when developing KDE applications. The Qt library does not have a dual license, it has tree. The GPL, the commercial and the QPL. The QPL allows you to use any OSS license, as long as you release the source code.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Read the article
by tbutler on Wed 13th Jul 2005 23:08 in reply to "RE[2]: Read the article"
tbutler Member since:
2005-07-06

The QPL is not compatible with all licenses (it is, for example, incompatible with the GPL). Now, it could be that between the QPL and GPL all FOSS licenses are somehow compatible with Qt, but I'm pretty certain that that is not the case.

Reply Parent Score: 1