On 2/12/2009 12:44 PM, Sundance wrote:
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
You're basically restating your previous point, without debating mine.
The language choice affects companies much more than £350 /
programmer.
Hi Giovanni, hi Phil, hi everybody,
Giovanni, I'm... a bit uncomfortable writing this
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Sundance sunda...@ierne.eu.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 01:05:34PM +0100, Knapp wrote:
Sometimes I think it would be good to have a commercial license that
says please pay us after 2 years if you have the cash, perhaps with
interest to make up for the
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:29:53 +0530, Rajeev J Sebastian wrote:
How about when people (who do not code, and have not coded in their
entire life) also demand that your work be made free (as in free
speech) so that they can profit enormously from it ? That also
strikes me as being cruel.
I
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Jim Bublitz jbubl...@nwinternet.com wrote:
On Tuesday 10 February 2009 14:41:02 pm Knapp wrote:
Oh, btw what implications it has for your application/development
to use Qt or PyQt licensed under GPL or LGPL or commercial is
something you should discuss with
On 2/11/2009 4:32 AM, Brian Kelley wrote:
What are the alternative options so PyQt can be LGPLd? I can see three:
1. PyQt is LGPL’d but support costs money. (I would still pay for
support, not that I actually have needed it, mind you, Phil is
usually on top of the ball as far
On 2/11/2009 7:57 AM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Knapp magick.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Comes down to if pyQT is LGPL then I write in my fav lang python, if
not then I go back and relearn C++ and face the brackets that I hoped
never to face again. :-)
As said many
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Giovanni Bajo ra...@develer.com wrote:
I doubt that any company on earth would save £350 and change programming
language. This kind of decision is made by amateur programmers that just
want to play around with Qt, but those can already use the GPL version.
Not
On 2/11/2009 4:09 PM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Giovanni Bajo ra...@develer.com wrote:
I doubt that any company on earth would save £350 and change programming
language. This kind of decision is made by amateur programmers that just
want to play around with Qt,
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:21:29 +0200, Ville M. Vainio vivai...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Phil Thompson
p...@riverbankcomputing.com wrote:
The selection of a language happens much earlier than the selection of a
GUI toolkit. A GUI toolkit is (or at least should be) a
On 10.02.09 19:56:44, Knapp wrote:
I see that the newer QT4.5 has the LGPL license. Does this mean that
pyQT will also have this license? Does using this license mean that
you can use the lib and write a closed source app without having to
pay for a license?
Please read the archive, this has
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Andreas Pakulat ap...@gmx.de wrote:
On 10.02.09 19:56:44, Knapp wrote:
I see that the newer QT4.5 has the LGPL license. Does this mean that
pyQT will also have this license? Does using this license mean that
you can use the lib and write a closed source app
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Knapp magick.c...@gmail.com wrote:
pyQT is not?? and never will be but maybe someone named Phil is still
thinking about it?
Anyway answer like that are about as helpful and friendly as RTFM.
mputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
Phil is the person who made PyQt
On 10.02.09 22:10:05, Knapp wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Andreas Pakulat ap...@gmx.de wrote:
On 10.02.09 19:56:44, Knapp wrote:
I see that the newer QT4.5 has the LGPL license. Does this mean that
pyQT will also have this license? Does using this license mean that
you can use
Knapp wrote:
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Andreas Pakulat ap...@gmx.de wrote:
On 10.02.09 19:56:44, Knapp wrote:
I see that the newer QT4.5 has the LGPL license. Does this mean that
pyQT will also have this license? Does using this license mean that
you can use the lib and write a
Oh, btw what implications it has for your application/development to use
Qt or PyQt licensed under GPL or LGPL or commercial is something you
should discuss with a lawyer.
Andreas
Yes, all is clear now, thanks.
This bit about the lawyer always strikes me as funny. I am looking at
releasing
On 10.02.09 22:49:57, Stef Mientki wrote:
Knapp wrote:
Comes down to if pyQT is LGPL then I write in my fav lang python, if
not then I go back and relearn C++ and face the brackets that I hoped
never to face again. :-)
No no, just join the wxPython group !
Hmm, personally if I have to
On Tue Feb 10 21:49:57 GMT 2009, Stef Mientki wrote:
On 10.02.09 19:56:44, Knapp wrote:
That is the best I can tell by all that but really someone could just
be straight and answer my question.
Are you in a hurry or something? Qt won't be LGPL until the final 4.5 release
so there's still
On Tuesday 10 February 2009 14:41:02 pm Knapp wrote:
Oh, btw what implications it has for your application/development
to use Qt or PyQt licensed under GPL or LGPL or commercial is
something you should discuss with a lawyer.
Andreas
Yes, all is clear now, thanks.
This bit about the
On 2/10/09 6:13 PM, Jim Bublitz jbubl...@nwinternet.com wrote:
I've never minded people using my software for free - even commercially.
I just hate it when they whine about software being free, but not on
terms where they can profit enormously from other people's work. It's
the whining, not the
On Tuesday 10 February 2009 19:44:12 pm Arthur Pemberton wrote:
And I empahisze with Jim and having to deal with whinners. They get
into every open source project and drain the lead developers of their
drive -- it's pretty unfortunate. I hope Jim does what is best for
him, as much as I would
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Knapp magick.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Comes down to if pyQT is LGPL then I write in my fav lang python, if
not then I go back and relearn C++ and face the brackets that I hoped
never to face again. :-)
As said many times before, *nothing has been announced on
21 matches
Mail list logo
