I was referring more to the closed-source nature of the Windows operating system. from the non-commercial FAQ @trolltech: http://www.trolltech.com/developer/faqs/noncomm.html#Q3 "Why didn't you release Qt for Windows under GPL? The GNU GPL and the Trolltech QPL are open-source, respectively Free Software licenses. Note the capital "F". We are not talking "free" as in "free beer", but "Free" as in "Free Speech". We released Qt/X11 under those licenses, because it runs as major component on totally Free operating systems, such as GNU/Linux and FreeBSD. Once Microsoft Windows is completely open source, we will reconsider." -----Original Message----- From: owner-qt-interest@trolltech.com [mailto:owner-qt-interest@trolltech.com]On Behalf Of Justin Karneges Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 1:12 AM To: qt-interest@trolltech.com Subject: Re: Qt/Free for Windows On Friday 06 December 2002 04:32 am, Patrick Stinson wrote:

I hate to burst your bubble on the "trolls," but it is said on the trolltech website that a qt release like that (or any, for that matter) on windows does not follow suit with their business model. That is the reason that they have not, and do not intend to provide a free release, post-2.3.

Yes, I know. However, I think their stance might be different in light of this porting project. It doesn't matter if Trolltech refuses to make a Free version for Windows. It is bad for them if such a port exists exists _at all_, regardless if it comes from them or not. I think Trolltech should care about this. Really, the free software developers just want a more workable situation. I'm sure Trolltech could intervene with a solution for everyone, rather than wait for an independent effort that could be damaging to them. If nobody was trying, then yeah they probably wouldn't (and shouldn't) care. -Justin -- List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/