Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 237702
qt4: x11 opensource edition seems GPL-only.
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:12:02 EST
Description of problem: The License tag of the qt4 package should perhaps be changed to "GPL", instead of GPL/QPL. The header of all source files of Qt 4 only mention LICENSE.GPL, even if LICENSE.QPL is shipped in the tarball. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): All
OK, talked it over with spot, and he agreed that this is/should-be gpl-only.
fwiw, not something worth respinning for immediately, but I'll make sure to include this change in the next/future build.
%changelog * Thu Mar 29 2007 Rex Dieter <rdieter[AT]fedoraproject.org> 4.2.3-8 - License: GPL, dropping QPL (#237702)
Actually, Trolltech policy is confusing. A friend of mine spotted out that web page: http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/licenses/licensing/opensource which says: "For historical reasons, the Qt/X11 version is also available under the QPL license. We do not recommend the use of the QPL, especially if you are planning for your Open Source software to be distributed on Mac OS X or Windows." Should we ask Trolltech (first, then maybe Fedora Legal) for explanations?
jwb, spot's take (in irc) was pretty clear: [10:30] <rdieter> jwb, spot: now I'm confused: http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/licenses/licensing/opensource [10:31] <rdieter> jwb, spot: "For historical reasons, the Qt/X11 version is also available under the QPL license" [10:31] <spot> Yeah, but we don't care. Its GPL only for what we care about. [10:31] <rdieter> worksforme. [10:31] <jwb> rdieter, still no issues. GPL only is what you want. they even say not to use QPL [10:32] <spot> it basically says "you can use it under QPL if you want." [10:32] <spot> we don't want. :) [10:32] <jwb> "you can use it under QPL if you want. But if you do, you suck"