Re: [Gnumed-devel] Qt licensing issues for GNUmed

[Karsten Hilbert]

> >From the development point-of-view, the situation with Qt is not
> as bad as it first seems, because everyone can use the free 
> Linux/Unix/MacOSX version of Qt to do GUI work. My understanding
> is that these GUI builders save a .ui file,
Which will reduce me to having to use the GUI builder which in
turn will force me to *always* go back and forward-port the
functionality code into the "new stubs" whenever I change some
whimsicial aspect of the user interface. Not me.

> which is an XML 
> representation of the GUI, plus stub code in C++.
Not me. Not at this stage. I am not going to go out and write
code in C++ which gets scrapped (or is being discussed as getting
scrapped) at the rate we are doing now :-)   OTOH I always
said I ain't be seen coding significant amounts of GUI code
anyways unless forced to by sword and fire (and I can
withstand a lot of both, actually ...). In Python I write it
and it runs - most of the time.

But maybe I misunderstand the concept.

> Both of these are portable to Windows, where, if you have the
At this stage I don't want to *port* but rather want to
load-and-execute. However, see above.

> to one or at best a few people who have the quite expensive commercial
> Qt and PyQt software. Of course, these people can then distribute 
> no-cost runtimes so lots of people can do runtime testing of the
Hm. I do not intend to write GnuMed for it to be distributable
as "no-cost runtimes". I intend to distribute the source code.
One reason being that I thusly free *myself* from any obligation
towards the "customer" regarding features requests etc. That is
important to me and my time. Quite selfish hence very simple
to express.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346