On 2 May 2017, at 6:26 am, Alan Garny <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > Back in March last year, we exchanged a few emails about QScintilla's license > and the fact that it is now released under GPL v3 only (and under a > commercial license), i.e. no more linking exceptions as it used to be the > case before (see > https://www.riverbankcomputing.com/pipermail/qscintilla/2016-March/thread.html#1105). > > At the time, you said: "Qt is moving to either GPL & commercial or LGPL & > commercial depending on the nature of the product and I want to have things > similarly simple. There is an argument (especially given the previous > exceptions) that QScintilla should be aligned with Qt (and therefore be LGPL) > rather than, say, QtCharts. I will give that serious consideration." > > I was therefore wondering whether you had given LGPL+commercial some thoughts?
I have been thinking about it but I haven't come to any conclusion yet. Some circumstances have changed (which I won't go into) and may change again. I promise you that I haven't forgotten about it. Phil _______________________________________________ QScintilla mailing list [email protected] https://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/qscintilla
