[lsb-discuss] Re: [lsb-futures] Qt libs ... included in the kernel 2.6 ... Why still blocked?
taggart at carmen.fc.hp.com
Thu Nov 6 14:34:09 PST 2003
"Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando" writes...
> I know that very well ... But the Linux Kernel are using it!!!, in other
> words if someone that wants to
> compile the kernel in graphical mode will compile the file:
> that requeries the Qt library. What is the situation in this case about
> the licenses?
The Linux kernel has their own license criteria and the LSB Workgroup
has no control over that. It's really up to them to decide, and for
the most part doesn't affect the LSB since it doesn't specify kernel
> Generally it is included ... in any case to avoid licenses restrictions,
> Qt must be used like ... the Linux kernel,
> I think.
> ... So, actually both the Linux Kernel and Qt are at the same level: GPL.
> Qt is GPL ...
As Ted pointed out, the LSB does not accept API/ABIs for components
with only a GPL implementation either.
There are a couple things that could happen that would allow the Qt
API/ABI could meet the LSB's License criteria and be added to the LSB,
1.) The licence of the Trolltech implementation could be modified to
meet the license criteria
2.) Another implementation could be made available that does meet
the license criteria that would be a suitable for people who
are restricted by Trolltech's implementation.
I'm still not sure what your point has to do with the LSB's License
criteria, can you explain?
I get the impression from your various posts to the LSB mailing lists
that you may think we are in some way discrimiating against Qt.
Do you feel this way?
The LSB selection criteria rules are designed to produce a standard
that allows for maximum possible participation and increase the use
of Free Software. We are not playing favorites, any interface that
meets these criteria can be added to the LSB, including Qt.
However the interpretation of these criteria, and the criteria
themselves, are determined by the consensus of the LSB(and larger
Linux-based OS) commmunity. If you ever do not agree with the
interpretation of the criteria(or the criteria themselves) please
argue your case(preferrable on the lsb-futures mailing list, but
whereever you like). You are part of the LSB community too and
are part of that consensus process. OK?
Matt Taggart Linux and Open Source Lab
taggart at fc.hp.com Hewlett-Packard
More information about the lsb-discuss