XEmacs + Qt

http://some.net/transcripts/rms-19980613-gnu.log <lilo> there's been a lot of recent discussion about the whole business with Qt and KDE....I had wanted to ask you, if you could, to talk about that whole business <rms> just because it encouraged someone to use GNU/Linux. <rms> Qt is a library which appears to be technically useful, but is not free software. <rms> Like all the other non-free programs out there, it's outside <rms> of the free software community. <rms> KDE is a free program which was developed so that it needs Qt in <rms> order to run. <rms> This has a paradoxical result: although KDE is free software, <rms> it is useless as an addition to a free operating system, <rms> because there is no way to run it on a free operating system. <rms> In order to run KDE, you need to add Qt, which means that the operating system is no longer entirely free. <rms> The KDE developers thought that they would "get the job done faster" <rms> if they used Qt--but the real result is that the wrong job got done. <rms> It's like saying, "we can build this segment of track faster if we don't <lilo> okay, for some of our participants who are maybe not clear on the problem with the Qt license....I don't want to take a lot of questions on this, but could you tell us what, in your opinion, "breaks" the Qt license as free software? <rms> make it connect with the other segment". Maybe so, but if it doesn't connect, <rms> you don't have a railroad that works. <rms> I would have to look at the Qt license again; it has been several months <rms> since I looked, and I don't remember.<lilo> okay, let's see.... <rms> I think it was either that it is limited to noncommercial distrbution only <rms> or that distribution of modified versions is not allowed, or both. * lilo nods <rms> Either kind of restriction makes a program non-free; I just don't remember for certain which of these restrictions Qt has. <rms> By the way, the Qt license says it gives permission to link Qt <rms> with GPL-covered programs; however, if you actually do that, you would <rms> violate the GPL. <rms> If the authors of a GPL-covered program want to give permission for linking it <rms> with Qt, they can do so. <lilo> so regardless of the flaws you see in it, it just simply doesn't work connecting it to the GPL<rms> It's clear that the authors of KDE mean to permit this, for example, <rms> so it is permitted *for KDE*. But if you wanted to link Emacs with Qt <rms> you would have to ask permission from the FSF, and I can tell you <rms> that the answer would be no. The purpose of releasing Emacs under the GPL <rms> is so that it can't be mixed with non-free software. Extended versions <rms> of Emacs must be free software.