Re: Qt Xemacs ??
My last words.
>>>> "JH" == Jonathan Harris
<jhar(a)tardis.ed.ac.uk> writes:
JH> Assuming you've characterised rms's position correctly,
JH> wouldn't a simple check in configure to make --with-qt fail in
JH> the presence of --with-msw and/or when the configuration is
JH> *-pc-cygwin* solve the problem. Or am I being naieve?
I believe you're being naive. But who cares? I don't own _any_ code
in XEmacs, and never will (I've signed assign.future). It's rms who
matters, ask him.
>>>> "Andy" == "Andy Piper"
<andy(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Andy> What's the big deal here? Motif is not free, why should we
Andy> care about the license status of Qt. Indeed Windows is not
Andy> free either, seems illogical that rms allows a port of emacs
Andy> to that platform.
Motif and Windows are exempted in the GPL as parts of the operating
system. The difference in interpretation between Motif and Qt has
been mooted before and rms has most clearly stated that Qt does not
qualify. Qt code must be GPL-able (eg, already GPL), or you may not
link GPLed code with it (and distribute the result; you may do what
you want on your own machine, as always).
Logic (as you implicitly define it) has nothing to do with it. The
decision as to which non-free software to allow linkage to is purely
strategic. In principle he would like to withhold permission in all
cases. If IBM were to switch to Linux and GPL AIX, Solaris were to be
GPLed, and the APSL fixed its last bug, GPL v3 might not allow the OS
exclusion (and too bad for Windows users and HPUX...). He _can_ do it
for future versions of Emacs _and XEmacs_ (ask him or any decent
lawyer, don't believe me), and I believe that under certain
circumstances (very unlikely in today's Windows World), he would.
If rms thinks that allowing linking to certain non-free software
(Windows system DLLs, libXm.so) will primarily result in free software
replacing non-free software, he allows it. If he feels that
withholding permission for linking with certain non-free software (Qt)
will encourage people to use free software instead (GTK+), then he
will most definitely withhold permission.
If somebody else wants to do the work of getting rms's OK for
GPL-avoidance schemes, then I will do the managerial work related to
integrating Qt support. Otherwise I will resist any integration of Qt
patches as too dangerous.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
My nostalgia for Icon makes me forget about any of the bad things. I don't
have much nostalgia for Perl, so its faults I remember. Scott Gilbert c.l.py