From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 29 11:32:22 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB3716A41F for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:32:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from danny@ricin.com) Received: from smtpq1.home.nl (smtpq1.home.nl [213.51.128.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1E243D1F for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:32:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from danny@ricin.com) Received: from [213.51.128.133] (port=37164 helo=smtp2.home.nl) by smtpq1.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1Dnank-0002Hz-OF for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:32:20 +0200 Received: from cp464173-a.dbsch1.nb.home.nl ([84.27.215.228]:51444 helo=desktop.homenet) by smtp2.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1Dnanj-0002vk-A3 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:32:19 +0200 From: Danny Pansters To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:30:56 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 X-Face: "0Qv=,p:+]LvuqrtS4U\z3k"qN=.1]@=?utf-8?q?=258=3F=3BPoab=23v=27F=7E=0A=09!Wm=5Fe-=24=7EL=5D=3B?=>[c*L^Qoladj)x@mH}Bqz"vLO?Zdl}[@V@=?utf-8?q?U=3Fx3=23lI=3A=0A=09=24DN=7E!Hr?=@K`-mNv"zXm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200506291330.56499.danny@ricin.com> X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean Subject: [FYI] QT4 licensing looks very bad for *BSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:32:22 -0000 Folks, I don't want to scare anyone but today QT4 was released and their web page (http://www.trolltech.com/download/opensource.html) specifically states several times that if using the free version one is required to release their own code under GPL. That's effectively a requirement to relicense which goes much further than the GPL itself. The former licensing amounted to "abide to the GPL or QPL" as is normal for a GPL project and in that case one could release code under BSDL and if anything let the next guy worry about it (if they want to distribute a derivative). I think this should be discussed. I already sent the Trolls an email asking for clarification about this, or rather if it's as bad as it seems for us. Perhaps they just overlooked the *BSDs... Dan PS keep your flames to yourselves. This is serious.