The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: GPL version of QT for MacOS X?
by john jones on Monday 24/Sep/2001, @15:20
|
take a wild guess !
my guess is NO
if you want to run GPL software on darwin why dont you run X ?
then you can run GPL QT
search for XonX
regards
john jones
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: GPL version of QT for MacOS X?
by Ian M on Friday 28/Sep/2001, @14:27
|
Though I don't know anything about porting QT for X Windows to Mac, there are some planning to do this for Windows. Check out:
http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/faq.html
Apparently there is not a whole lot to port - QT obviously does not want to have a lot of platform specific stuff.
Currently kde-cygwin requires X Windows, but as you can see from the FAQ they are planning to port to native windows.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: GPL version of QT for MacOS X?
by Justin on Monday 24/Sep/2001, @21:35
|
My guess is no. I believe Qt/Mac will be treated exactly like Qt/Windows. Here's my detective work as to why:
1) Check out this link: http://www.trolltech.com/company/announce/edumac.html
Apparently, Qt/Mac will be free for academic use. This would only be relevent if there is no GPL Qt/Mac.
2) See the Non-commercial Qt FAQ: http://www.trolltech.com/developer/faq/noncomm.html
It states: "We released Qt/X11 under those licenses, because it runs as major component on totally Free operating systems..." and "Once Microsoft Windows is completely open source, we will reconsider." Since MacOS X is not fully open source, it will be treated like Windows.
3) The Aqua look is heavily guarded by Apple. If Qt/Mac was GPL, then the Aqua QStyle would be too. This would go against Apple policy.
There you have it.
We might see a "non-commercial" version, like they did with Qt/Windows.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
