Re: Qt becomes Free Software

[Jim Pick <jim jimpick com>]

James Smith <j-smith@physics.tamu.edu> writes:

> Section 5 says we can run the non-open source programs, we just can't
> develope them.  This is more restrictive than any GPL or LGPL.

Huh?  The GPL doesn't allow you to develop non-GPL'd programs.  Or, at
least, you aren't allowed to redistribute them.  I don't see how it is
more restrictive than the GPL.  It is more restrictive than the LGPL.

The license has the most in common with the MPL (Mozilla Public
License).  You can develop your own version under the license, but you
can't make a proprietary version - and the original company gets the
right to use your stuff (even in proprietary products).  RMS won't
like it (leads to forking, helps proprietary developers), but it's a
still a good solution for DFSG-free development.
 
This is good stuff.

I'd like to see a situation where Gnome apps will respect the settings
of the KDE environment if they are running inside it.  ie.  A KDE user
picks a theme, and runs a Gnome app - the Gnome app should adopt the
KDE theme.  Vice-versa should apply as well - if a user runs a KDE app
inside Gnome, the KDE app should use the theme and settings set up in
the Gnome Control Panel.

It would be really nice if baboon could be made to work with KDE
OpenParts as well.

There are plenty of other areas for co-operation.

Cheers,

 - Jim