Re: KDE/kdelibs/kdeui

Hi all,

> that is correct. the exceptions on Qt are for code that links to it, not to Qt
> itself.

I see.

> however, i just looked at the code for both classes, the one in Qt and
> Rafael's, and they seem to be significantly different in many areas. there
> are certainly some commonalities, but then there are only so many ways of
> doing something.
>
> it's also probably relevant whether Rafael copied the code and modified it
> from there (making it a derivative) or if he read the code in Qt and used it
> as a source of implementation ideas as he wrote his own implementation.

I copied the code. Understood it, rewrite it in a way I thought it was
more readable (sometimes changing some variable name as
InternalInformation instead of Mapping), and others changing some
things I just thought they were just better that way.

Unfortunately it is completely impossible to just do this stuff only
by reimplementing virtual methods. All the needed stuff is private, so
the class need to be rewritten for the purpose I want to. The need
have to come from "inside".

Of course, what my changes add is the feature to categorize elements
(better said, sorting/filtering taking in count categories) [that
needs 2 lessThan methods, and QSortFilterProxyModel only provides
one].

> in any case, the comment in the licensing header is not appropriate and needs
> to be removed, either because it doesn't belong in the first place (e.g. it
> wasn't a copy-n-paste job) or because the code is rewritten such that it
> satisfies those requirements.

I agree on removing it, but TT just could said that file is a modified
copy of theirs.

> IANAL, of course. =)

IANAL either :)


Bye,
Rafael Fernández López.
_______________________________________________
Kde-licensing mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-licensing