On Thursday 19 September 2002 5:41 pm, Greg Fortune wrote: > In reference to the discussion going on right now about licensing... Yes, > the qt dll can be distributed. Thus, PyQt can be distrubuted allowing that > you are not using the new commercial version of PyQt. The end user, of > course, would not be allowed to use qt in a development fashion such as > fixing bugs in your application. I think this means that if you develop an > PyQt application that is meant to be run on windows, you can *not* license > it under the GPL because the GPL requires that modification to the source > is allowed, at least in my understanding. That kinda sucks in a big way... > GPL apps for windows cannot be developed with Qt. And yes, Trolltech's > license is in the way here, but Phil's license is not helping things out... > > From the GPL, "You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any > portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and > distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, > provided that you also meet all of these conditions: " > > Anyone want to make me really happy and point out where I'm wrong? > > btw, trolltech, I would certainly like to hear the official stance on > developing GPL applications in Qt in Windows. It appears that even though > I've paid a chunk of money so I can develop commercial Windows/Linux > applications with Qt, I cannot license anything under the GPL if I use > Python/PyQt in any fashion (because it's crossplatform itself and would be > expected to run on Windows) and cannot develop *any* Qt application for > Windows that would be licensed under the GPL.
This is from memory, but it's the GPL that prevents you from developing GPL applications with Qt on Windows. A GPL application cannot be linked against closed source libraries that don't come with the machine. This excludes commercial Qt on Windows but includes commercial Qt on the Zaurus. > Does this mean that PyQt previous to the new license Phil implemented was > violating the Qt license agreement. Of course, this is a little silly, but > all the implications are in place... The previous PyQt license was based on the X11 license which doesn't impose the restrictions that the GPL does. > Has trolltech considered developing > wrappers for languages other than C++ so we don't have to play these games. > I suggest you take a look at Smoke, a recent addition to KDE. Maybe > something similar could be developed by Trolltech in house. I haven't looked at SMOKE but from what I've read I don't see how it can produce good quality bindings - at least for Python, maybe Perl doesn't have the same issues. As I understand it SMOKE means you can use the original C++ header files rather than having to maintain separate .sip-like files. The problem is that there is extra information that you need to specify somewhere (at least for Python bindings) to handle (for example) object ownership and threading. Phil _______________________________________________ PyKDE mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
