Re: resignations, flamewars, and the future

[Peter Teichman <pat4 acpub duke edu>]

On Thu, Nov 19, 1998 at 04:33:52PM -0800, MATTHEW ETTUS wrote:
> If the only reason you worked on GNOME was that KDE had bad licensing,
> you were working on it for the wrong reason.

I've seid this a couple times on IRC, and figure it is worth repeating
here:

As far as I'm can tell, the new licensing of QT changes only one thing
from the Gnome perspective: now we must compete on the basis of technical
merits alone. We can no longer revert to the "Well, your license is
invalid" argument. (This is assuming that the QPL is compatable with the
GPL, which hasn't been decided).

What real change does that create? None. How many of the Gnome developers
are more interested its license than what can actually be done with it?

Personally, I don't care what license QT uses. I'm interested in helping
produce the best desktop environment around. I think that Gnome is it.
Besides, it's a lot of fun.

Discussing licensing issues of other projects isn't very productive,
especially when those issues don't really affect us.. Back to the code.

Peter
-- 
Peter Teichman  (Parenthetic Me)
pat4@acpub.duke.edu