Big development in the GUI realm

[Gabriel B.]

> >>Considering the fact that the Qt DLL exist by themselves, that the
> >>version used is the one provided by Qt, and that the EXE uses a
> >>standard, open way to communicate with it, the above does seem to say
> >>this use would be valid.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >    http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation
> >
> >    "/.../ If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address
> >    space, that almost surely means combining them into one program.
> >
> >    By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are
> >    communication mechanisms normally used between two separate
> >    programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules
> >    normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the
> >    communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal
> >    data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts
> >    as combined into a larger program."
> >
> ></F>

This is odd. They claim it's a GPL'ed version, but it's a trolltech
license that forces you to release your code under gpl even tought
their's not!

I'm not against a company getting it's share with their product.
that's what motivated them in the first place. but DONT LIE! don't
call it gpl when it's not.

Gpl make it very explicity it deals with the program as a whole, in
the meaning of a executable code. What they're trying to achive here
is that, by adding this paragraph, they will cover the "dll use" under
the gpl.

By that cover-all definition they came up, i can't use Internet
Explorer to see a site hosted with a gpl'ed server! i can't even use a
BSD program to grep a file!

anyway... it will only mater when people with money cares. I already
have 3 choices.