On 2 April 2014 12:55, alfa <alfarobi0...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > If I understand it correctly regarding the licensing issue, you may want to > use LGPL(as opposed to GPL), that does not require you to release the source > code, however, perhaps somebody who are more experienced than me can explain > on this, because I'm also interested in knowing this issue and any possible > solutions. > > -alfa- > On Wednesday, April 2, 2014 12:47 PM, sarah jones <qtsa...@outlook.com> > wrote: > Hi > I team and I are planning to release our desktop application that is > dynamically linked to the Qt library. > As I understand it this means that, if requested by a customer, I must make > the source code for Qt available. > In addition I must make the object code or source code for the application > available to a customer on request. > > Has anyone any experience in this area ? > Are my understandings correct? > Are there any obligations on us if using the LPGL? > > Thanks > > Sarah >
Sarah, as far as I know your findings are correct. With GPLv3, you need to provide source code of your application when requested. You do not need to publish the code globally, only your customers can make the request. If you choose LGPL, there is no obligation on you to provide the source code of your application (you still need to provide source code of Qt, and inform customers that Qt is being used). Some minimal changes to Qt itself are permitted under Qt license exception. And if you buy the commercial license from Digia, you are free to do almost anything ;-) In all 3 scenarios you can charge money for the distribution of your application. Have a good day, sierdzio _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest