Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Andy]

Yeah - it doesn't even make sense.

"The intention in the marketplace was to allow open-source users to use
GPL-licensed modules in LGPL-licensed Qt without GPL obligations."

But Qt PDF is LGPL, right?

"The reason why Qt PDF is not available in the installer for open-source
users is simply that we wanted to make difference between commercial and
open-source installations. It was intentional, not a bug."

Translation: Commercial users already get it, so the marketplace version
isn't for them. We couldn't force the devs to make it GPL for our benefit,
so we want open source users to pay for it even though it's LGPL.

More license games from The Qt Company. They really have no idea (or don't
care) how badly this stuff reflects on them or what damage it's been doing
to Qt

---
Andy Maloney  //  https://asmaloney.com
twitter ~ @asmaloney 



On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Benjamin TERRIER 
wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 18:19, Jason H  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 11:54 AM
>> > From: "Konstantin Tokarev" 
>> >
>> > Isn't this done intentionally to promote commercial licenses among open
>> source users?
>>
>> Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to human stupidity.
>> -Hanlon's razor.
>>
>> For me, because there was confusion over this module's license, I
>> attribute it to that.  Which also would be the same result as applying
>> Occam's razor.
>>
>
> Well, now we know it was done on purpose:
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-87746?focusedCommentId=532011=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-532011
>
> Unfortunately, our marketplace backend does not support distributing
>> different variants of the modules. If we had the open-source version
>> available, then there would not be the Marketplace license -based version.
>>
>> The reason why Qt PDF is not available in the installer for open-source
>> users is simply that we wanted to make difference between commercial and
>> open-source installations. It was intentional, not a bug.
>>
>
> It seems The Qt Company is continuing to show love and appreciation toward
> the open source users
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Benjamin TERRIER]

On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 18:19, Jason H  wrote:

>
>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 11:54 AM
> > From: "Konstantin Tokarev" 
> >
> > Isn't this done intentionally to promote commercial licenses among open
> source users?
>
> Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to human stupidity.
> -Hanlon's razor.
>
> For me, because there was confusion over this module's license, I
> attribute it to that.  Which also would be the same result as applying
> Occam's razor.
>

Well, now we know it was done on purpose:
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-87746?focusedCommentId=532011=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-532011

Unfortunately, our marketplace backend does not support distributing
> different variants of the modules. If we had the open-source version
> available, then there would not be the Marketplace license -based version.
>
> The reason why Qt PDF is not available in the installer for open-source
> users is simply that we wanted to make difference between commercial and
> open-source installations. It was intentional, not a bug.
>

It seems The Qt Company is continuing to show love and appreciation toward
the open source users
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Jason H]

https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-87746

> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 12:22 PM
> From: "Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest" 
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer
>
> Il 20/10/20 17:28, Jason H ha scritto:
> > Then we should probably include the marketplace email address in this
> > thread.
>
> Open a bug report instead.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
> KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
> Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest]

Il 20/10/20 17:28, Jason H ha scritto:
Then we should probably include the marketplace email address in this 
thread.


Open a bug report instead.

Thanks,
--
Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts



smime.p7s
Description: Firma crittografica S/MIME
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Jason H]

> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 11:54 AM
> From: "Konstantin Tokarev" 
> To: "Benjamin TERRIER" , "Jason H" , "qt 
> qt" 
> Subject: Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer
>
> 
> 
> 20.10.2020, 18:12, "Benjamin TERRIER" :
> > On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 20:54, Jason H  wrote:
> >> There's some license shenanegans going on.
> >> https://www.qt.io/blog/change-in-open-source-licensing-of-qt-wayland-compositor-qt-application-manager-and-qt-pdf
> >> However there was a later update:
> >> https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2020-January/038457.html
> >>
> >> So I don't know why it was not included.
> >> It seems that some people (myself included) objected to commericalizing a 
> >> module that was based on a open source engine to start with.
> >
> > Yes, I've seen the discussions about the license, but I thought it was 
> > solved.
> >
> > Given that The Qt Company is selling the QtPdf module under a commercial 
> > license on the marketplace I was thinking that
> > they remove the QtPdf artefacts from the QtWebEngine packages. That would 
> > make sense for commercial users.
> >
> > However, for open source users it looks like a bug in the installer.
> 
> Isn't this done intentionally to promote commercial licenses among open 
> source users?

Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to human stupidity. -Hanlon's 
razor.

For me, because there was confusion over this module's license, I attribute it 
to that.  Which also would be the same result as applying Occam's razor.


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Konstantin Tokarev]

20.10.2020, 18:12, "Benjamin TERRIER" :
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 20:54, Jason H  wrote:
>> There's some license shenanegans going on.
>> https://www.qt.io/blog/change-in-open-source-licensing-of-qt-wayland-compositor-qt-application-manager-and-qt-pdf
>> However there was a later update:
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2020-January/038457.html
>>
>> So I don't know why it was not included.
>> It seems that some people (myself included) objected to commericalizing a 
>> module that was based on a open source engine to start with.
>
> Yes, I've seen the discussions about the license, but I thought it was solved.
>
> Given that The Qt Company is selling the QtPdf module under a commercial 
> license on the marketplace I was thinking that
> they remove the QtPdf artefacts from the QtWebEngine packages. That would 
> make sense for commercial users.
>
> However, for open source users it looks like a bug in the installer.

Isn't this done intentionally to promote commercial licenses among open source 
users?


-- 
Regards,
Konstantin
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Jason H]

 


Then we should probably include the marketplace email address in this thread.

 

 

Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 11:09 AM
From: "Benjamin TERRIER" 
To: "Jason H" , "qt qt" 
Subject: Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer



 
 


On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 20:54, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wrote:




There's some license shenanegans going on.

https://www.qt.io/blog/change-in-open-source-licensing-of-qt-wayland-compositor-qt-application-manager-and-qt-pdf

However there was a later update:

https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2020-January/038457.html

 

So I don't know why it was not included. 

It seems that some people (myself included) objected to commericalizing a module that was based on a open source engine to start with. 
 





 

Yes, I've seen the discussions about the license, but I thought it was solved.

Given that The Qt Company is selling the QtPdf module under a commercial license on the marketplace I was thinking that

they remove the QtPdf artefacts from the QtWebEngine packages. That would make sense for commercial users.

 

However, for open source users it looks like a bug in the installer.






___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Benjamin TERRIER]

On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 20:54, Jason H  wrote:

> There's some license shenanegans going on.
>
> https://www.qt.io/blog/change-in-open-source-licensing-of-qt-wayland-compositor-qt-application-manager-and-qt-pdf
> However there was a later update:
> https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2020-January/038457.html
>
> So I don't know why it was not included.
> It seems that some people (myself included) objected to commericalizing a
> module that was based on a open source engine to start with.
>

Yes, I've seen the discussions about the license, but I thought it was
solved.

Given that The Qt Company is selling the QtPdf module under a commercial
license on the marketplace I was thinking that
they remove the QtPdf artefacts from the QtWebEngine packages. That would
make sense for commercial users.

However, for open source users it looks like a bug in the installer.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Jason H]

There's some license shenanegans going on.

https://www.qt.io/blog/change-in-open-source-licensing-of-qt-wayland-compositor-qt-application-manager-and-qt-pdf

However there was a later update:

https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2020-January/038457.html

 

So I don't know why it was not included. 

It seems that some people (myself included) objected to commericalizing a module that was based on a open source engine to start with. 
 

Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2020 at 7:28 PM
From: "Philip Schuchardt" 
To: "Benjamin TERRIER" 
Cc: "qt qt" 
Subject: Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer


Oops missed typed the link, cavewhere.com
 


On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 7:27 PM Philip Schuchardt <vpica...@gmail.com> wrote:


I used QtPdf for mac and windows for my open source project (cavehere.com). 

 

I have to build QtPdf from source and install it for each platform and Qt version. Although it's not too bad, it isn't as automatic as all the other Qt modules. It would be great if it was supported directly.

 

 


On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 5:04 PM Benjamin TERRIER <b.terr...@gmail.com> wrote:



Hi,
 

I've noticed that QtPdf is missing when using open source Qt with the online installer.

I was wondering what's the reason  for this?

 

As QtPDF is sold under a commercial license on the Qt marketplace I understand it cannot be distributed as part of Qt WebEngine for commercial users.

But for open source users?

 

Also it seems that QtPDF was indeed built when the release packages were build, but got partially removed. For instance on Windows the DLLs are still there, and on Linux the debug symbols are still there.


 

That means that open source users have to build Qt PDF themselves, it is a bit cumbersome.
 

Regards,

 

Benjamin

 


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest



___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest



___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Philip Schuchardt]

Oops missed typed the link, cavewhere.com

On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 7:27 PM Philip Schuchardt 
wrote:

> I used QtPdf for mac and windows for my open source project (cavehere.com
> ).
>
> I have to build QtPdf from source and install it for each platform and Qt
> version. Although it's not too bad, it isn't as automatic as all the other
> Qt modules. It would be great if it was supported directly.
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 5:04 PM Benjamin TERRIER 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've noticed that QtPdf is missing when using open source Qt with the
>> online installer.
>> I was wondering what's the reason  for this?
>>
>> As QtPDF is sold under a commercial license on the Qt marketplace I
>> understand it cannot be distributed as part of Qt WebEngine for commercial
>> users.
>> But for open source users?
>>
>> Also it seems that QtPDF was indeed built when the release packages were
>> build, but got partially removed. For instance on Windows the DLLs are
>> still there, and on Linux the debug symbols are still there.
>>
>> That means that open source users have to build Qt PDF themselves, it is
>> a bit cumbersome.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>> ___
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest@qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Philip Schuchardt]

I used QtPdf for mac and windows for my open source project (cavehere.com).

I have to build QtPdf from source and install it for each platform and Qt
version. Although it's not too bad, it isn't as automatic as all the other
Qt modules. It would be great if it was supported directly.


On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 5:04 PM Benjamin TERRIER 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've noticed that QtPdf is missing when using open source Qt with the
> online installer.
> I was wondering what's the reason  for this?
>
> As QtPDF is sold under a commercial license on the Qt marketplace I
> understand it cannot be distributed as part of Qt WebEngine for commercial
> users.
> But for open source users?
>
> Also it seems that QtPDF was indeed built when the release packages were
> build, but got partially removed. For instance on Windows the DLLs are
> still there, and on Linux the debug symbols are still there.
>
> That means that open source users have to build Qt PDF themselves, it is a
> bit cumbersome.
>
> Regards,
>
> Benjamin
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

[Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Benjamin TERRIER]

Hi,

I've noticed that QtPdf is missing when using open source Qt with the
online installer.
I was wondering what's the reason  for this?

As QtPDF is sold under a commercial license on the Qt marketplace I
understand it cannot be distributed as part of Qt WebEngine for commercial
users.
But for open source users?

Also it seems that QtPDF was indeed built when the release packages were
build, but got partially removed. For instance on Windows the DLLs are
still there, and on Linux the debug symbols are still there.

That means that open source users have to build Qt PDF themselves, it is a
bit cumbersome.

Regards,

Benjamin
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest