I think that in Qt, the irritating question about licenses, that appears when executing 'configure', must be removed. So I suggest to change it.
I saw that other things should be modified as well: README* INSTALL FAQ... And a lot of references to trolltech should be converted into references to Trinity: qt-bugs@trolltech.com --> http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/ etc.
I need a clarification about licenses. According to /usr/share/doc/libqt3-mt/copyright (Trinity version): "Qt 3.3 is triple licensed under the QPL, GPL 2 and GPL 3." But Trinity web site says: "any Qt3 version released by this project is licensed under the GPL only" http://www.trinitydesktop.org/wiki/bin/view/Documentation/Releases_3_5_13 Does it means there is a bug with 'THE Q PUBLIC LICENSE' which should be removed?
And about modules, may the lines (225-227) MODULES="styles tools kernel widgets dialogs iconview workspace inputmethod" [ "$PLATFORM_QWS" = "yes" ] && [ "$Products" = "qt-professional" ] && MODULES="$MODULES network" [ "$Products" != "qt-professional" ] && MODULES="$MODULES network canvas table xml opengl sql" be replaced by MODULES="styles tools kernel widgets dialogs iconview workspace \ inputmethod network canvas table xml opengl sql" without breaking things?
A third question: will Trinity Qt support Mac and QWS?
I reported a bug: http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=628 with a patch for the 'configure' file, to be reviewed: http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/attachment.cgi?id=128 * Free edition GPL 2 & 3 only (no QPL) * Interactive part about licenses removed * Defined modules: "styles tools kernel widgets dialogs iconview workspace inputmethod network canvas table xml opengl sql"
On 11/16/2011 04:22 AM, Laurent Dard wrote:
I think that in Qt, the irritating question about licenses, that appears when executing 'configure', must be removed. So I suggest to change it.
Why?
sed -i "s|read acceptance|acceptance=yes|" configure
Le 17/11/2011 00:17, scrat a écrit :
Why?
Because that's confusing. It says: "You are licensed to use this software under the terms of either the Q Public License (QPL) or the GNU General Public License (GPL) versions 2 or 3." But Trinity decided to release Qt under the GPL only.
And because it's useless and boring. It makes free software looks like non-free software. It makes GPL looks like a contract. That's strange.
FSF: "The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to communicate about it with the developer or any other specific entity."
You don't need to say yes to a stupid script that doesn't even hear you! ;-)
sed -i "s|read acceptance|acceptance=yes|" configure
or: echo yes|./configure
but what for?
I just suggest to print a message about the GPL, without asking for answers.
On 17 November 2011 11:50, Laurent Dard f.couperin@online.fr wrote:
Le 17/11/2011 00:17, scrat a écrit :
Why?
Because that's confusing. It says: "You are licensed to use this software under the terms of either the Q Public License (QPL) or the GNU General Public License (GPL) versions 2 or 3." But Trinity decided to release Qt under the GPL only.
And because it's useless and boring. It makes free software looks like non-free software. It makes GPL looks like a contract. That's strange.
FSF: "The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to communicate about it with the developer or any other specific entity."
You don't need to say yes to a stupid script that doesn't even hear you! ;-)
sed -i "s|read acceptance|acceptance=yes|" configure
or: echo yes|./configure
but what for?
I just suggest to print a message about the GPL, without asking for answers.
+1
Either way, we need to remove the reference to the QPL.
Calvin Morrison
-
Calvin Morrison -
Laurent Dard -
scrat