On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 07:21:38AM +0000, Knoll Lars wrote: > 2. New modules that get added to Qt Project from now on can be licensed > either under > for simplicity, i would suggest qt-project states preferences for specific options:
> * LGPLv2.1, LGPLv3 and commercial or > of course lgpl2 still makes sense for add-ons hosted outside qt-project, and ones where the author explicitly doesn't want digia to make money from selling this module (though in this case i wouldn't host on qt-project to start with). i don't suppose many people would object if we officially discourage this option ... > * LGPLv3, GPLv2 and commercial > strongly encouraged, for the reasons given by digia. > * LGPLv3 and commercial > is this really a good idea at this point? the intention would be to prevent fully open-source (gpl2) applications that still cannot be swapped out by the user (e.g., by requiring signing with particular proprietary keys), which is good as such. but with qt's long history, there are now many gpl2-only applications which cannot be relicensed any more, so they won't be ever able to use these new modules. it's a trade-off that needs to be pointed out. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
