If I am not mistaken the copyright of Gnucash is donated to the FSF, so Gnucash actualy is a GNU project. Anyways I think that FSF don't mind as long as your software is all LGPL/GPL, hey, it is free marketing for them:)
The only thing you need is gnome-libs installed. Don't think you have to install any other component of GNOME. As for bloat, gnome-libs provides functionalty that many apps need, it would be more bloat for each and every app to implement such things themeselves.
Great idea, eveytime a new license witch places more and more restrictions on the codes use is released, we just change the GPL to allow it. Then in the end we have a system where code sharing is impossible. because all components are under a special license. Good thinking.
How a few manage people get excited about Opera is above me, it is doomed to be niche product, who migth have a chance to be popular in a few embeded devices etc. As a full fledged desktop browser it will always lag behind Mozilla or IE, in regard to such things as 3rd party support and support of new web standards. Opera is small-time on the windows plattform and will be small-time on Linux. In the long run I expect derivatives of Mozilla to kill of Opera once and for all, even on embeded devices. For those pointing to the memory footprint of Mozilla, it is my clear opinion that this will become smaller as the Mozilla team starts to optimize the code. In addition to that I would expect the large majority of Linux users to just use Mozilla as a rendering engine for Eazel's Nautilus in the long run.
A positive sidenote was that the film didn't end with them realizing it was 4th of July, and declaring that the world independence day. And somebody finding and old US flag in the rubble they could proudly wave above their heads.
Of course they couldn't completely stay away from this with him finding the declaration of indepence and washington d.c. being the capital of all the worlds tribes.
If the QPL truly is free try this; take code from two different pieces of code based using the QPL, for instance Qt and the Zen engine, create a new application out of that mixed codebase (like you can with the GPL) and release that new product under the QPL.
What are you saying, is that illegal, that the QPL makes codesharing impossible?
But how can that be, the QPL is just as good as the GPL isn't it?
I quote D. Faure: 'Troll Tech have put a lot of time and effort into producing a high quality toolkit and in all fairness they should get paid if you sell an application that uses Qt.'
Please, everytime I hear KDE developers give this line I want to cry out. What kind of reasoning is that? I that was the logic we should follow with Linux, then shouldn't the kernel developers get paid, the Xfree86 developers, the gtk developers, the GNOME developers, or for that matter the KDE developers and so on. Or is the Troll Tech people the only ones who contribute time and effort.
Face it the QPL is a crappy license which only aim was to be 'free' enough to kill of the Harmony project.
So KDE developers get a grip, it is your right to develop your software with quasi-free libraries, but stop pretenting that the Linux community should be gratefull to Troll Tech, they are just a bunch of developers like everybody else, but developers using a license which is more in the spirit of Microsoft than the Linux community.
Glade does this for free, lets you design GUI without having to wrote code. And whats even better is is totally free to use, even for commercial entities. Think the URL is http://glade.pn.org/
This is quite old actually, and has been discused here and other place numerous times. Borland have some shares in Troll Tech, and there seems to be some ties to Qt in Kylix, my guess is that Delphi (Pascal) is implemented as some sort of Qt wrapper. And it is not Dr. Dobbs it is Dr. Bobs.
Having every release of the bigger distributions announced on Slashdot is a waste of bandwith. When the editors see something with a new distro\version they like, please post, but in cases like this, were there are only some small changes to the polish, don't post it. If you do decide to post, at least include a link to a full changelog for the distro.
"Some open-source licenses may go a little too far," he said. "It's one thing to facilitate open access, but another to demand it. That's what you are trying to get away from." Well, if you don't like the way the GPL works Mr. Love I think your company should start selling another OS. Why did Caldera get involved with Linux in the first please if the way the GPL works is such an evil to you! You and your company are a disgrace, start to sell Solaris then, they should have a license you can identify with.
With Corel Office, IBM Toppage and now this using Winelib I guess that winelib has reached a level where it is usable. While it is great to have more apps for Linux, I am not sure if it is a good thing is if all we get are windows recompiles instead of real ports using the Linux native widget set Gtk. Guess time will tell if this was a great way to get linux rolling onto the desktop, or just something that made people think that Linux, like OS/2, didn't have any apps of its own, and thereby was of little interest.
That is the point, as long as FreeBSD lingers in obscurity nobody tries that kind of stuff, but as soon as the are money to be made they try it. There are plenty of examples in the Linux world of this being tried, but the GPL has hindered them in doing this on important parts.
People who are trying to decide whether to rely on Linux or BSD should note that the two commercial BSD-based companies are unifying at the same time that the Linux market is being divided up into smaller and smaller fragments.
This one is to good to be true, what they forget is that even the smallest of these fractions usually command a higher marketshare than FreeBSD systems.
Another thing is that if FreeBSD ever took of, like Linux have, the BSD license would also lead to more fracturing in that marketspace than we will ever see in the linux world. Adding proprietary extensions to FreeBSD would be the norm, and the BSD license would allow it.
Gtk is much more plattfrom independent than Qt. First of all you have both Win32 and BeOS ports of the core C gtk toolkit. Then you have multiplattform Win, Be and Mac C++ support through both wxWindows and the AbiSource-tk. And last the VDK toolkit is also ported to Win32. In addition to that I am sure you can do multiplatfom development using the Mozilla technology stack, which in addition to the others are ported to OS/2 and Amiga. Or in other words, using Qt is paying for something that is available in better incarnations for free. That amounts to a long range of nails in the Qt casket:)
Judging from other GNOME software 0.9 isn't necesarily the latest release before 1.0., it might very well be followed by 0.10 and so on.
But in any case version numbers don't mean a shit, often get the feeling that people actually believe that these numbers actually symbolises some objective measurement of a project's current status.
Slashdot Mirror
If I am not mistaken the copyright of Gnucash is donated to the FSF, so Gnucash actualy is a GNU project. Anyways I think that FSF don't mind as long as your software is all LGPL/GPL, hey, it is free marketing for them :)
The only thing you need is gnome-libs installed. Don't think you have to install any other component of GNOME. As for bloat, gnome-libs provides functionalty that many apps need, it would be more bloat for each and every app to implement such things themeselves.
Great idea, eveytime a new license witch places more and more restrictions on the codes use is released, we just change the GPL to allow it. Then in the end we have a system where code sharing is impossible. because all components are under a special license. Good thinking.
How a few manage people get excited about Opera is above me, it is doomed to be niche product, who migth have a chance to be popular in a few embeded devices etc. As a full fledged desktop browser it will always lag behind Mozilla or IE, in regard to such things as 3rd party support and support of new web standards.
Opera is small-time on the windows plattform and will be small-time on Linux.
In the long run I expect derivatives of Mozilla to kill of Opera once and for all, even on embeded devices.
For those pointing to the memory footprint of Mozilla, it is my clear opinion that this will become smaller as the Mozilla team starts to optimize the code. In addition to that I would expect the large majority of Linux users to just use Mozilla as a rendering engine for Eazel's Nautilus in the long run.
If you read the original post, he said that their app was for the Mac. I don't think they would want to leave their current customers behind.
Of course they couldn't completely stay away from this with him finding the declaration of indepence and washington d.c. being the capital of all the worlds tribes.
What are you saying, is that illegal, that the QPL makes codesharing impossible?
But how can that be, the QPL is just as good as the GPL isn't it?
Please, everytime I hear KDE developers give this line I want to cry out. What kind of reasoning is that? I that was the logic we should follow with Linux, then shouldn't the kernel developers get paid, the Xfree86 developers, the gtk developers, the GNOME developers, or for that matter the KDE developers and so on. Or is the Troll Tech people the only ones who contribute time and effort.
Face it the QPL is a crappy license which only aim was to be 'free' enough to kill of the Harmony project.
So KDE developers get a grip, it is your right to develop your software with quasi-free libraries, but stop pretenting that the Linux community should be gratefull to Troll Tech, they are just a bunch of developers like everybody else, but developers using a license which is more in the spirit of Microsoft than the Linux community.
Glade does this for free, lets you design GUI without having to wrote code. And whats even better is is totally free to use, even for commercial entities. Think the URL is http://glade.pn.org/
This is quite old actually, and has been discused here and other place numerous times. Borland have some shares in Troll Tech, and there seems to be some ties to Qt in Kylix, my guess is that Delphi (Pascal) is implemented as some sort of Qt wrapper.
And it is not Dr. Dobbs it is Dr. Bobs.
Having every release of the bigger distributions announced on Slashdot is a waste of bandwith.
When the editors see something with a new distro\version they like, please post, but in cases like this, were there are only some small changes to the polish, don't post it.
If you do decide to post, at least include a link to a full changelog for the distro.
"Some open-source licenses may go a little too far," he said. "It's one thing to facilitate open access, but another to demand it. That's what you are trying to get away from." Well, if you don't like the way the GPL works Mr. Love I think your company should start selling another OS. Why did Caldera get involved with Linux in the first please if the way the GPL works is such an evil to you! You and your company are a disgrace, start to sell Solaris then, they should have a license you can identify with.
I haven't seen it myself, but there is a Gnomacs module in GNOME CVS which is being worked on at the moment. Thought you might be interested.
With Corel Office, IBM Toppage and now this using Winelib I guess that winelib has reached a level where it is usable. While it is great to have more apps for Linux, I am not sure if it is a good thing is if all we get are windows recompiles instead of real ports using the Linux native widget set Gtk. Guess time will tell if this was a great way to get linux rolling onto the desktop, or just something that made people think that Linux, like OS/2, didn't have any apps of its own, and thereby was of little interest.
That is the point, as long as FreeBSD lingers in obscurity nobody tries that kind of stuff, but as soon as the are money to be made they try it. There are plenty of examples in the Linux world of this being tried, but the GPL has hindered them in doing this on important parts.
This one is to good to be true, what they forget is that even the smallest of these fractions usually command a higher marketshare than FreeBSD systems.
Another thing is that if FreeBSD ever took of, like Linux have, the BSD license would also lead to more fracturing in that marketspace than we will ever see in the linux world. Adding proprietary extensions to FreeBSD would be the norm, and the BSD license would allow it.
Gtk is much more plattfrom independent than Qt. First of all you have both Win32 and BeOS ports of the core C gtk toolkit. Then you have multiplattform Win, Be and Mac C++ support through both wxWindows and the AbiSource-tk. And last the VDK toolkit is also ported to Win32. In addition to that I am sure you can do multiplatfom development using the Mozilla technology stack, which in addition to the others are ported to OS/2 and Amiga. Or in other words, using Qt is paying for something that is available in better incarnations for free. That amounts to a long range of nails in the Qt casket :)
Judging from other GNOME software 0.9 isn't necesarily the latest release before 1.0., it might very well be followed by 0.10 and so on.
But in any case version numbers don't mean a shit, often get the feeling that people actually believe that these numbers actually symbolises some objective measurement of a project's current status.