[CMake] QtDialog isn't installed?
Hendrik Sattler
post at hendrik-sattler.de
Wed Nov 21 10:27:40 EST 2007
Quoting Bill Hoffman <bill.hoffman at kitware.com>:
> Brandon Van Every wrote:
>> On Nov 20, 2007 2:59 PM, Brandon Van Every <bvanevery at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 20, 2007 2:41 PM, Brandon Van Every <bvanevery at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I think in the real world, Kitware can distribute QtDialog under
>>>> CMake's license, and Linux distro gatekeepers won't object.
>>> I would suggest making clear reference to the exception in the
>>> QtDialog source code. So that (1) some Linux distro ninny doesn't
>>> come along later and erroneously "discover that CMake source is in
>>> non-compliance," and (2) third parties are aware of the additional
>>> obligations they'll have to fulfill if they want to reuse the QtDialog
>>> code.
>>
>> On second thought, before providing such a notice, it's best to get
>> CMake into that list of license exceptions.
>> http://trolltech.com/products/qt/gplexception Otherwise, CMake would
>> be calling attention to a license condition that, pedantically
>>
> What we plan to do is use a pure BSD license, and remove the extra line
> that is currently in the CMake license. That way there is no trouble.
> With the qt exception, you can link all you want, you just can not
> develop.
But the same applies to both: changes not push upstream and changes
that get pushed upstream. Since the original is BSD licensed and I add
e.g. new functionality to it, I either:
- need a commercial license to distribute the result as BSD licensed
again , or
- have to distribute the result as GPL licensed.
Is the latter actually possible? Not from my understanding of this.
So I am allowed to link against the GPL version of Qt but I cannot
modify it and distribute the result.
Since the DFSG was mentioned already: it would go to non-free on
Debian, I guess.
If the above is true, what about dual-licensing it? A modified version
could then distributed GPL licensed and others can choose BSD license
for unmodified versions.
HS
PS: no, I don't actually care for the GPL but I care about cmake
staying in Debian main.
More information about the CMake
mailing list