KDE 3.2, To Be Or Not To Be 36
Richard Moore writes "As you can see from dot.kde.org, issue #53 of Kernel-Cousin KDE has been released, covering only a single topic. The plan for releasing KDE 3.2 is discussed at length, or maybe that should be KDE 4.0 - who knows..."
Re:Why use KDE (Score:1, Interesting)
To say something crazy:
We all know you have nuclear weapons
. Okey, they find them!
We can't.
okey, i need sleep now, but i agree, thats for sure.
Re:Why use KDE (Score:5, Insightful)
maximum freedom
maximum respect for the community
Is it the fact that they fell short of agreeing with you totally that upsets you so?
Re:Why use KDE (Score:2)
I don't know if this is a problem in practice here, but dual licensing only works if you own the entire copyright of all the source.
One benefit of the GPL licenese is that it allows the community to contribute code. However this contributed code is copyrighted by the individual author but you can use it under the GPL. But Trolltech cannot automatically use that contributed code under their other licenses. One of three thi
Re:Why use KDE (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not so sure - I prefer to develop in GTK+ because I know I have the flexibility to use my code however I like in the future. My code is currently all GPLed, and I have every intention of maintaining it GPLed, but if there was a good reason down the track to make a closed fork, GTK+ gives me that option.
Result: I use GTK+ for writing Free software.
Re:Why use KDE (Score:2)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:2)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:1)
Yes, I can understand that - but the reason the LGPL exists is for this exact reason. If every binary compiled with gcc had to be GPLed, then the FSF would be happy - but only if that meant the binaries were opened. It would be far more likely that proprietary software would not be developed on GPL OSes instead.
While I'm no fan of proprietary software, it does serve as a benchmark to compete with. Netscape 4, for instance, allowed Linux users to have a graphical browser until free/open browsers became
Re:Why use KDE (Score:2)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:1)
I agree - TT's scheme makes a lot of sense - but (obviously) I can't pay $1500 for something without commercialising it. That means the cool features of Qt (Win32/Mac compatibility) are pretty much off-limits to Open Source developers (last time I checked, there is a non-commercial version of Qt for Win32 for download, but its licencing is GPL-incompatible.)
GTK+ leaves open the Windows option, and the closed-source option (note: only for a new version. Once GPLed, always GPLed.)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:1)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:2)
Re:Why use KDE (Score:3, Informative)
The parts of QT that KDE uses are available under the GNU GPL. GNOME does have the the blessing of the Free Software Foundation, since it's a GNU project, but the important thing is to use Free Software.
QT-embedded and some other TrollTech software is proprietary, I'd advise people not to use it, but KDE is Free Software.
It is counter-productive for Free Software projects to fight against eachother. Deep divides are just what M$ and the proprietary w
Re:WOW (Score:3, Informative)
It took me 30 seconds to find this:
http://www.trolltech.com/download/index.ht
and specifically the parts that KDE uses:
http://www.trolltech.com/download/qt/x11.h
They're dual licensed under the QPL (non-Free) and the GNU GPL. When you obtain the software you can choose to use and distribute it under either license.
Ciaran O'Riordan
Re:WOW (Score:5, Informative)
Rich.
Re:WOW (Score:1)
Re:WOW (Score:1)
Gnome and KDE (Score:1)
Yes, thank you. KDE and Gnome can coexist peacefully.
I happen to prefer KDE's interface, but, as long as KDE can run Gnome/GTK(+) apps and Gnome can run KDE/QT apps, I'm not going to go insulting Gnome or Gnome users.
Gnome does some things better than KDE; KDE does some things better than Gnome. Both are excellent, free, envi
Re:Why use KDE (Score:3, Informative)
I can't wait.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:hooray for version number games! (Score:2, Informative)
KDE 3 was called KDE 3 so as to show that it broke compatibility with KDE 2.x by using QT 3 instead of QT 2.
Clarification (Score:5, Informative)
Rich.
Re:Here (Score:1)
Well.....a "go fuck yourself" seems to be appropriate here....
Want to develop on KDE 3.2 ? (Score:2, Funny)
Want to develop applications on KDE 3.2 ?
Get the GTK license on eBay dirt cheap [ebay.com]