On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 11:30 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Andrew Bartlett <abartlet <at> samba.org> writes: > > The bit that bothers me is that not only was Samba for the longest time > > mentioned in most GPLv3 news articles, we asked if anybody had a reason > > not to change our licence, and nobody gave a compelling reason. > > There definitely have been complaints from the KDE camp, both on public news > sites like Slashdot and on KDE developer blogs. Slashdot ? On Slashdot anybody can say anything and the contrary, I wonder why people is so shy to talk directly with other developers when they need to... > See, the KDE project can't just move to GPLv3, most of their code is actually > LGPL (which allows converting to any GPLv2+) or GPLv2+ already, but Qt is GPLv2 > only. So KDE can't do anything without Trolltech, and Trolltech is still in > the "evaluating their options" phase. Maybe with a bit of pressure because of a real problem they will be faster ? > Also be aware that if the problem gets solved, it will be solved only for KDE > 4, KDE 3 relies on Qt 3 which is not supported by Trolltech anymore, so the > chances for that to change its license are essentially nil. If Qt3 is obsolete I can't understand why Trolltech can't add an exception there, it should be actually much more easier for older unsupported software, after all who cares for that? It's going to slowly disappear from the scene anyway and GPLv2 vs GPLv2+/exception for v3 does not make any difference in that case. In any case I was under the impression that F9 was going to use KDE4/QT4, have plans changed ? Simo. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
