Re: fundamental errors with QT
Well, releasing QT under the GPL is bad only if
you intend to sell your application without the
I think the GPL license is more suitable to
free software than BSD or LGPL.
> Trolltech made 3 fundamental errors with
> (1) Orginally releasing QT under a
> non-free license
> Numerous license issues with KDE GPL
> software being incompatible with the
> orginal QT license. Many of the OSS
> community disapproved of Trolltechs
> license, which eventually spawned the
> Gnome project. Some people (like myself)
> still see Trolltech as just another
> money making business, rather than being
> truely part of the OSS community.
> (2) Releasing it under a Dual license
> QPL, GPL.
> Why not license a "library" under the
> LGPL? or BSD? Obviously it was there
> strategy on the Windows platform side of
> things, keep it closed and make more
> money off it.
> (3) Ignoring OSS on any platform other
> than *nix.
> They want huge profits, unlike other
> toolkits.. most are completely free
> (Motif?) Regardless of platform. OSS
> developers should embrace more open
> toolkits that actually promote harmony
> among other platforms and work/develop
> with community input, rather than
> companies trying to profit off it.
> Trolltech are more interested in profits
> than benefiting the general OSS
> community, by not supporting a
> multi-platform toolkit they're
> disadvantaging themselves, and
> discouraging a broad user-base over
> different operating systems. OSS happens
> not just on Linux, but a number of
> operating systems, OSX, *BSD, Windows,
> OS/2, BeOS etc...
> Someone should remind Trolltech.
> OSS *is* Operating System Independant
> ps. I'd be very surprised if dot.kde.org
> would publish this FM story, so
> one-sided some KDE related websites,
> anything anti-KDE/QT would be
> ignored,removed and banned.