Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gnome kills KDE

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    honton, du solltest den link lesen, bevor du deine eigene Interpretation immer wieder herunterbetest. Es steht alles drin, und bis auf die non-linux-platforms (die dank Abstraktion leicht wieder hinzugefügt werden könnten) sind alle deine Punkte falsch. Insbesondere die Zusammenfassung der Auswirkungen.

    (ich schreib das auf Deutsch, da du entweder unfähig bist Englisch zu verstehen oder du einfach nur das liest was dir in den Kram passt. Alternativ hast du einfach keine Lust eine produktive Diskussion zu führen, aber das nehmen wir lieber nicht an, denn es würde bedeuten du wärst ein Troll )

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by Honton View Post
      Let us ask mgraesslin if you are correct or not. That will answer another question as well. Is KDE able to communicate about this agreemnt in a fair and transparent way?
      i don't know what you mean with fair and transparent, he linked all the actual contracts in a public page of kde.org and the repositories are 100% public in qtproject.org, QTopia was killed 90% with Qt4 and totally scrapped with Qt5.X and wayland in Qt5 is an external project in gitorious + EGL improvements in QtGui/Opengl/core all available publically in qtproject.org and licensed as LGPL.

      How LGPL/GPL works is totally publically available from FSF and even explained in youtube from stallman in some videos

      what you want? a puppet show in youtube with big big letters to explain it to you line per line? otherwise i think is quite self explaning and really easy to figure it out since everything is entirely public and even so you have mailing list / IRC logs publically available too over all discussions concerned to this matter

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Honton View Post
        So you are telling me open source the KDE way takes a lawyer degree?
        if you wanna whine about licenses/contracts in any project private or public you need a lawyer degree for the details and minimal reading skills to understand it, this is like really ovbious or you will let your chef friend make a contract for you? i bet you will call a lawyer in the same sense you will not call your stripper friend to do your taxes, you will pay an accountant!! which again is baltantly ovbious

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by Honton View Post
          They say what I say.
          my dear child, I took the time to look for the link to the mailing list thread just for you. To give you a non-legal-speak explanation of the topic. As I took the time it would be totally awesome if you would read them. Some of your questions are answered there.

          Originally posted by Honton View Post
          Free Qt Foundation does NOT cover non-linux platforms, wayland or embedded linux.
          Wayland is basically covered. The agreement states "X Window System or any successor [...]". Android is covered, what else is "embedded linux" or relevant in that regard I do not know. If you had read the mails I linked to you would have also got an update on the non-linux (which is wrong in the first place as BSD, etc. is covered) and the problems from legal perspective.

          Originally posted by Honton View Post
          Free Qt Foundation does NOT cover other version than "Qt Free".
          Did you actually read the agreement? It explains what that is. And are there any other versions of Qt which differ or are allowed to differ?
          Originally posted by Honton View Post
          Free Qt Foundation IS exclusive KDE, bcause no one outside KDE are repesented at the board.
          So what? I don't see the problem here.

          Originally posted by Honton View Post
          I think it is great this is set in stone now, you should educate who ever falsely claim that KDE have some kind of super power and they can do ehat ever they want with Qt's lisence. Because it is not true.
          Uh I think nobody ever claimed that. The idea behind the foundation is to have a safety-net in case the development to Qt is stopped and to prevent proprietary forks.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by Honton View Post
            So you are telling me open source the KDE way takes a lawyer degree?
            If you check my blog you will find that I said that I would not sign the Canonical CLA, because I would need a lawyer to properly understand it and to have it explained to me. For Qt I didn't need to, because I know that KDE's lawyer checked the CLA.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by Honton View Post
              So you are telling me open source the KDE way takes a lawyer degree?
              No, I tell you that you need a lawyer to interpret licenses and contracts. Look at the GPL, do you really think that it wasn't checked by lawyers before it was ratified?

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by Honton View Post
                So you are telling me open source the KDE way takes a lawyer degree?
                It doesn't really matter any way.
                There's a large amount of movement onto the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries and they're largely moving away from GTK+

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by Honton View Post
                  So you are telling me open source the KDE way takes a lawyer degree?
                  All the lawyers in the world couldn't help you. You have extremely poor/selective reading comprehension, and as soon as someone tells you something you don't want to hear, you twist their words and/or take them out of context to fit your biased view. You have a better chance of understanding open-source licensing by taking a legal textbook and beating yourself over the head (if you need help with that, let me know).

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Its awesomely frightening to see what one guy/gal/inbetween can do with an unbased claim.
                    8 Pages, 79 comments an counting.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by Honton View Post
                      Two competing explanations have be proposed to explain the sudden loss of contributors at KDE.

                      1) People walked away.
                      2) Most commits happens to feature branches where merges make more than half the contributor names disappear. Not by merge, but per month, that is a whole lot ghost hacking if you ask me.

                      You can always opt for the less likely explanation, but doing this AND throw ad hominem insults might push it a bit too far.
                      The answer, as you and I know it, is 2. Please, browse freely all of their KDE ghost hacking repositories. Nothing of what you are going to see is registered in Ohloh.

                      http://quickgit.kde.org/

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X