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!). http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html The Qt Public License (QPL). This is a non-copyleft free software license which is incompatible with the GNU GPL. It also causes major practical inconvenience, because modified sources can only be distributed as patches. We recommend that you avoid using the QPL for anything that you write, and use QPL-covered software packages only when absolutely necessary. However, this no avoidance longer applies to Qt itself, since Qt is now also released under the GNU GPL. Since the QPL is incompatible with the GNU GPL, you cannot take a GPL-covered program and QPL-covered program and link them together, no matter how. However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered library (called FOO), and you want to release your program under the GNU GPL, you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict for your program by adding a notice like this to it: As a special exception, you have permission to link this program with the FOO library and distribute executables, as long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the software in the executable aside from FOO. You can do this, legally, if you are the copyright holder for the program. Add it in the source files, after the notice that says the program is covered by the GNU GPL.

Bill> Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org&gt; 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!). >> From >> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html 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.