corection qt is open source but gtk has no restrictions on use

[ZIYAD A. M. AL-BATLY]

On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 15:32 -0400, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> azz wrote:
> 
> > Some have felt that dual or multiple licencing like this makes Qt
> > non-free.
> 
> 
> Huh?  LOL!
> 
> 
> The really strange thing is that the Qt bashers...
I'm not a Qt basher myself, but I'm an admirer of GTK+.

> ...that come up with this crazy stuff have nothing bad to say about
> the Linux kernel which is released under the GPL rather than a "freer"
> license...
If you want to use the Linux Kernel you don't need to *link* against it!
You only call some functions from "libc" (which is LGPL) or any other
library to do your work.  So, personally I fail to see the connection
between comparing the Linux Kernel with Qt or GTK+ (license wise).

> ...(which to the FSF folks is a joke in itself), as many wanted it to,
> yet it has succeeded far more than the "more permissively" licensed
> BSD clones have.
I'm a Linux fan (and I don't hate FreeBSD or any other flavor of the
BSDs) but to know better why Linux had so much success compared to the
BSDs you need to dig into history.  BSDs originally were *not* Free
Software, not by a long shot!  They had a *lot* of propriety code back
then that can't be released under a Free license.  At that time, a young
OS was emerging that *is* 100% pure Free Software.  It's name was Linux.
Hackers (not crackers, but hackers) were so delighted to have a
Free/free OS that they can tinker with it's internals and was supported
by a very good and open minded maintainer: Linus Torvalds.  *After* the
huge success for Linux among hackers, geeks, and nerds around the globe,
it starts to penetrate it's way to corporate markets (with the influence
of those people of course).

> So if the GPL isn't free enough for you, why aren't you using
> FreeBSD?  :)
Very good and valid question.

> 
> Newsflash:  To people who believe in Free Software as opposed to Open
> Source, the GPL IS THE BEST LICENSE THERE IS, ...
Personally, I beg to differ!  GPL _is_ the best license out there for
applications but not for libraries!  For those, the best license in my
humble opinion would be LGPL.

> ...and Qt's success has nothing to do with its licensing, it has to do
> with the fact that Qt is the best designed and certainly best
> documented *CROSS-PLATFORM* GUI widget library available under any
> license, especially their new Qt4, and all the bad mouthing in the
> world won't change that.
No comment as I don't know the internals of Qt.

> 
> 
> 

I know this post might start a new Holy War (that's if it isn't started
already!) but all I meant of it is to explain why I believe that the GPL
is great for applications but not for libraries.
Ziyad.