Hi Matthew,
I have tried to be very clear in explaining that the whole point of this email
thread is about mixing open-source and commercial, which not a the most common
use case. I do not know what are the questions that I have tried to avoid
answering. Yes, there are many users of Qt who use
Hi Matthew,
Unless you are in the situation described by the person who originated this
email thread, I am rather sure you can continue using the GPL version of
Creator.
The whole point of this email thread was situations where the same development
project team (creating the same product)
On Wednesday, 1 April 2020 06:47:07 -03 Filippo Rusconi via Interest wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> my software program (GUI) builds/runs fine on Debian GNU/Linux, but I fail
> to run it on MinGW64. I can build it fine, but when I run it, the error
> message (in a system dialog box) is that the (mangled
On 31/03/2020 16.12, Krzysztof Kawa wrote:
> This got me thinking about quite a simple case that doesn't seem so
> simple now: Lets say I make a game using open-source licensed Qt, or
> even just open-source licensed Qt Creator. After few years of
> development I decide to publish the game. It
On 31/03/2020 09.46, Andy wrote:
> Even a solo developer needs to hire a lawyer before touching anything
> Qt-related.
Fortunately for the OSS community, you forgot "commercial" in that sentence.
> Once you start trying to codify all the different scenarios in your
> licensing, it becomes toxic
Sorry had to laugh...
> Yup... except I'd probably use some less polite terms than "tone-deaf".
Fair point... tone-deaf can be a bit insulting..
>This sort of thing, and also the recent installer changes, continues to
>make me think that TQtC is *trying* to commit suicide. That, or
On 30/03/2020 13.49, Andy wrote:
> That makes no sense. Your license prevents a company from using an
> open-source tool? It says "if you license our stuff you cannot use the
> open-source tool X"?
That is, indeed, what I am hearing, and also how I would interpret the FAQ.
> This whole thread is
On 31/03/2020 14.16, Francis Herne wrote:
> Having looked through said document, the relevant sections seem to be:
>
>> 1. ... “Prohibited Combination” shall mean any means to (i) use, combine,
> incorporate, link or integrate Licensed Software with any software created
> with or incorporating
On 27/03/2020 08.55, Tuukka Turunen wrote:
> Correct. All users need to have commercial license. It is not allowed for
> part of the team to use commercial and part use open-source. Even though Qt
> Creator is great, it can feel odd to pay for full Qt license and only use the
> Creator IDE.
>
A more complete example. also narrow the bug, if the parent is set to self
before launching the object the signal no more reach it, work under 5.14.0,
5.14.1 but not on 5.14.2. This is a show stopper for 5.14.2. I have open an
issue:
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/PYSIDE-1255
From: Interest
Hi,
I was trying the signal/slots for a Python application, but with the new
version I discovered that the signal is no more reaching my Qml anymore,
reverting to 5.14.0 PySide2 fix the problem.
Python code:
from PySide2.QtCore import QObject, Signal
class BObj(QObject):
...
Can you please provide any reference of cross compiling ICU 58.x as I end
up getting one error or other in configure line?
On Tue, 31 Mar, 2020, 14:27 Konstantin Tokarev, wrote:
>
>
> 31.03.2020, 11:54, "Ramakanth Kesireddy" :
> > Since the old compiler doesn't supports c++11, we got to use Qt
Hi,
As I have said earlier in this thread it can feel odd that the restriction of
mixing extends also to the Qt tools, even in case framework libraries are not
used.
I want to again emphasize that this is something that does not affect
open-source use of Qt – as long as it is not done in
Hi,
What I get from the explanations from Tuukka is that the commercial
contract includes what amounts to legal carpet-bombing aiming to prevent
bad faith actors to use loopholes to their advantage.
The unfortunate consequence is that good faith actors can feel unsafe if
they try to read the
Greetings,
my software program (GUI) builds/runs fine on Debian GNU/Linux, but I fail to
run it on MinGW64. I can build it fine, but when I run it, the error message (in
a system dialog box) is that the (mangled name that I c++filt'ered)
qResourceFeatureZlib() entry point is not found in my
Hi,
I think you are now twisting and mixing things incorrectly.
For example, working in a company who has a commercial license of Qt does not
in any way hinder contributing to Qt.
Yours,
Tuukka
On 1.4.2020, 9.32, "Interest on behalf of Roland Hughes"
wrote:
On 3/30/20
On 31/3/20 6:09 am, Roland Hughes wrote:
Just be aware that UltraEdit like many other PC originating editors
gets tabs wrong. When you set tabs to spaces and set their width to 4,
hitting when cursor is in first column of the line has to put
the cursor in column 4, not 5 like far too many PC
On 3/31/20 1:21 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
Note: I don’t speak in the name of my cie, but my own opinion here. Just
stating the fact that the Qt license is the main reason we often ditch Qt for
some application.
The same reason it is being ditched wholesale by lots of
On 3/31/20 12:49 AM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
I guess the conflicting terms are these:
“Prohibited Combination” shall mean any means to (i) use, combine, incorporate, link
or integrate Licensed Software with any software created with or incorporating Open
Source Qt, (ii) use
I sent this the other day but it hasn't made it into the list yet. At
least I haven't seen it. Forwarding because it is pertinent
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt Creator licensing for companies with Qt,
Commercial developers
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:09:42
All,
Man, an entire day compiling from source.
./configure -opensource -confirm-license -release -skip qtwebengine
-opengl desktop -qt-sqlite -qt-zlib -qt-libjpeg -qt-libpng -qt-freetype
-qt-pcre -qt-harfbuzz -nomake examples -nomake tests -prefix
/usr/local/qt-5-14-1 -platform win32-g++
On 3/30/20 1:03 PM, Andy wrote:
That makes no sense. Your license prevents a company from using an
open-source tool? It says "if you license our stuff you cannot use the
open-source tool X"?
This whole thread is yet another great example of where the Qt Company is
totally tone-deaf.
Nobody
It's not just you.
On 3/27/20 9:03 AM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
Hi,
is it just me or this is heading into the wrong way, or at least into the
opposite direction of the market. Most IDE are now free, even the embedded
world start giving IDE away:
xCode is free
vs code is free
23 matches
Mail list logo
