On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:31:37 +0100, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Phil Thompson wrote: >>> That seems weird to put it politely. I would have thought they both had > >>> the same interfaces? >> >> It's not a technical limitation. It is to prevent people developing a >> commercial product with the GPL version and then switching to the >> commercial version at the last minute. The PyQt commercial license has > the >> same restriction. In reality we would be open to discussion (usually >> involving backdating the purchase of the commercial licenses). > > Heh, I'd *love* to see this one come to court ;-) > Seriously, I'm all for licensing that sees companies rewarded for their > hard work, but I'd be seriously interested in how this would be argued > in court... > > Thankfully all the stuff I'm developing is open source, so I don't have > that problem :-) > >>> Anyway, some questions: >>> >>> - where do I get the Qt Designer from? >> >> It's part of Qt. > > Is this Qt for Java or Qt for C++? Which one do I install?
Certainly Qt for C++, probably both. >>> - how come PyQt4 isn't on PyPI? (Nowadays I'm used to just specifying >>> packages as egg requirements in a buildout.cfg >>> (http://buildout.zope.org/) but I guess I can't do that with PyQt4?) >> >> PyPI is a PIA to use when you are not using eggs. > > Okay, let me rephrase: how come PyQt4 isn't available as an egg? > (for the record, I hate eggs, but the python community has adopted them, > so I'm just attempting to put up and shut up. zc.buildout does offer > some analgesic for the agony) It's never seemed important. I'm also not sure that distutils is up to the job of building PyQt. > cheers, > > Chris > > PS: You going to be at PyConUK? Yes. Phil _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list [email protected] http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
