Re: GNOME & KOM/OP

[Stefan Westerfeld <stefan space twc de>]

   Hi!

On Thu, Aug 06, 1998 at 05:30:33PM -0500, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> 
> Robert Ellsworth said:
> 
> > I hate to ask this.  And perhaps I don't know enough.  But in light of the discussion
> > and sniping in the last few hours regarding object models for GNOME, it might be
> > worth posting some information...
> > 
> > As I understand things from sources such as Stefan Westerfeld:  "The GNU Component
> > Model will not support KDE/Qt (the license is not acceptable)...
> 
> I posted to the list that this is a missunderstanding from Stephan's
> point of view.  The libraries that make up the component model will be
> released under the GNU LGPL, which will allow linking with restrictive
> libraries, such as Qt.  Even usint it in proprietary software.

Yes, I was sure that it would allow it. But there is big difference
whether you are allowed to do something, or supported.

> > Meanwhile, you're doing a solution based on "OLE", instead of
> > 'reworking' the KOM in some way.  Is this the Microsoft OLE?  (If
> > not, what then?)
> 
> It is modeled after OLE2.  You can not really implement OLE2 without
> providing a subset of the Win32 API, that is why it is being *modeled*
> after OLE2 (ie, the interfaces, the messages, the interactions).

What about KOM? You ignore it completely?

> > Has the Evil Empire, then, put the OLE standards and all the
> > documentation thereto in the public domain, under the terms of a
> > GNU-acceptable license, and agreed that all further development of
> > OLE shall be completely open in the public domain, again as required
> > (imho) by the GNU requirements?
> 
> They have done a pretty good job at publishing all of the inner
> workings in various books published both by them and by third
> parties. 
> 
> But your question regarding the license does not apply as we are not
> using any Microsoft code at all.  I am reading published specs by
> third parties. 

Are they free, BTW? I can develop CORBA, because I can get the specs and
docs free off the net. I can resitribute them. I am not sure about
modifications, though. What about COM/Active-X & co? I need to buy
a book to be able to understand how to develop for Gnome? I may not
copy the book and share it with a friend?

Not very polite... ;(

> > This isn't about OLE's technical superiority to something like KOM.
> > On the other hand, it would seem that a lot more developers in KDE
> > are concerned with workable free software than is the case at
> > Micro$haft.
> 
> Can you point exactly what is wrong with COM/OLE2/Active-X or are you
> just speaking out from an anti-microsoft point of view?

It's not wrong by itself. It's just wrong because KOM exists.

Bad example, but: It is like making Gnome incompatible with X applications.
This wouldn't be a bad descision if you could come up with something
better, _AND_ no significant amount of X applications for linux/unix
existed. But today, it would be not clever, I guess.

   Cu... Stefan
-- 
  -* Stefan Westerfeld, stefan@space.twc.de (PGP!), Freiburg/Germany
     KDE Developer, project infos at http://space.twc.de/~stefan/kde *-