>>>> "Bill" == William M Perry
Bill> Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>>>> "Bill" ==
William M Perry <wmperry(a)aventail.com> writes:
Bill> I told him to join xemacs-beta, and that XEmacs/Qt would be doable. It
Bill> would arguably make a better cross-platform toolkit for windows / mac / unix
Bill> than GTK.
Bill> And seeing it run on the Qt framebuffer would be
worth every ounce of energy
Bill> spent doing the port. :) XEmacs on the iPaq.... hmmm...
>> Do keep in mind that the FSF considers XEmacs/Qt
illegal. I happen to
>> disagree with that, and believe that Motif and Qt are functionally at the
>> same level - if you can use one, you can use the other. However,
>> XEmacs/Qt might become *the* politically controversial application in the
>> free software world (but that's good for publicity!).
Bill> Well, the trolls have released all of the code as dual-licensed now. You
Bill> can choose either QPL or _real_ GPL. So people will finally argue about Qt
Bill> and GTK on technical merits, like OO just rocks and C sucks, instead of
Bill> about licensing terms. :)
Bill> The Free Edition is the Qt for Unix/X11 toolkit, licensed for development
Bill> of free/Open Source software. It includes the complete source code. As of
Bill> version 2.2, it is freely available under both the GPL and the QPL Open
Bill> Source licenses.
Apparently I didn't read my own post thoroughly.
Qt/GPL is indeed good news.
If Qt is a C++-only thing, you (Ravikiran) should be aware that XEmacs is
"C++-ready", that is, I have been using a C++ compiler to build XEmacs
for years. Good Luck creating XEmacs/Qt.