> This is an important issue for this project.I > think,it should be cleared (eventually with > trolltech) before start the project. > > http://www.trolltech.com/developer/knowledgebase/192/ > > http://www.trolltech.com/developer/faqs/Licensing
That helps. The last I checked, they had not made it clear that you could do that, and based on the terms of the GPL, I assumed I could not. It was also never clear whether works that used the Qt library under the QPL had to be distributed under the QPL. That would appear to not be the case (which is wonderful!!!). However, there are still a few problems, the Open Source Edition of Qt is *only* available under the GPL on Windows (so if you were developing a true cross-platform portable app, you would have to GPL it if you released it for Windows). However, I think I can live with that :) Trolltech states that (from your first link): "If the Open Source Edition was licensed purely under the GNU GPL, there would be problems. However, as long as Qt-based software is either open source or was developed under a commercial license agreement with Trolltech, we grant permission to compile, link and run those programs with the Open Source Edition. This is written down in our second open source software license, the Q Public License (QPL)." That solves my main issues with Qt, and makes me very happy. This was one of my big gripes about Qt for a long time. However, it still fails in two areas: 1) The encouragement of platform adoption which means no licensing fees (especially yearly) just to have the right to develop for a platform. Which means Qt is still not a great choice for a business platform. This one is important for desktop business choice, but not important to me since I doubt I will ever develop commercial applications on my own. 2) Doesn't solve the ABI problem others mentioned (which is really an industry (or GCC), and NOT Qt problem). This is somewhat bothersome, but something I already have to deal with for a C++ based project I work on... Thanks for posting this information, nonetheless. It look as if they have significantly updated their FAQs and licensing sections. -Shawn This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
