>Would you please pay your money to some programmer who then writes a Gtk
>based Qt replacement under GPL instead of paying some "scum sucking,
>bottom-feeding lawyers" with it? Thanks.
Right.
To Terry:
- KDE is 800.000+ lines of GPL. No problem for Gimp or anyone else.
- Qt is freely available to everything GPL, including Gimp and KDE. No
problem here.
- Nobody GNU ever had a problem with Motif except that it sucks,
or with linking against Motif, although Motif was never free.
But with Qt, which is more free, this shall suddenly be a
problem? You are kidding.
- There are warranties in place to ensure that Qt stays so, and Troll
actively supports these. No problem here.
It was TOG, the very Motif TOG, that tried to own tons of
contributed code for X11 (much more fundamental than Motif).
And you complain about linking against Qt, but not about
linking against Motif.
- Nobody GNU ever demanded that TOG provides a free replacement
for Motif. Instead the GNU community got up and started
LessTif themselves. But KDE or the Trolls shall be responsible
for providing a free alternative? Why?
- Still, there is Harmony, the project for a free replacement of
Qt and it is making good progress. So stop whining and help
them, if you think that Qt's license is a problem.
But no, instead you start all over and create a second,
incompatible toolGit throwing away several 100,000 lines of
fine code that has already been written for KDE. Is it just me
or is this really, objectively stupid?
- There is a problem left: I, the end user, will be forced to
install two extremely large toolkits on my machine for the
next five years. I will be forced to load two different GUI
toolkit libraries into scarce memory the next five years. I
will be forced to learn to operate and customize two different
widget sets the next five years. And I will be forced to deal
with interoperability problems the next five years.
I think that sucks.
And looking at the calendar I recognize that it was not KDE
who started this unfortunate split. Perhaps the Qt license is
problematic in your eyes. But Gnome was the most sucky
approach to fix that particular problem that I can possibly
imagine.
I really hate it (with "it" being "this situation").
So, if the G people (Gimp, GTK and Gnome) complain to the K
people about "taking away their project", the K people have
every right to complain about the G people doing just the same
in the first place when they started the second desktop
project. Calling Kimp unethical in this situation is highly
hyprocritical in my eyes.
Thanks for listening. This just had to get out,
Kristian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html