On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 1:30 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 12:53:34 pm jtd wrote: > > And > > > http://trolltech.com/products/appdev/licensing/licensing#qt-open-source-lic > >ense > > this is a joke. If I modify or enhance QT - then they can compel me to > contribute such modifications to the community. But how can they compel me > to > release software written using QT? and further compel me to release it > under > the GPL only?? Sorry, no joke here. Only if you sell your modifications/enhancements are you required to release the source code. Keep it to yourself and Qt wouldn't give a damn. > "The Open Source Edition is freely available for the development of Open > Source software governed by the GNU General Public License versions 2 and 3 > ("GPL")." > > apparently this means that QT itself is not released under the GPL - the > open > source edition is released to 'develop open source software governed by the > GPL ...' huh? The operative word in your statement is "apparently" - and I can assure you that your understanding is wrong, unless you have your own English grammar and semantics. > > So I cannot use that to develop software I release under, say, BSD > license!. > So what license is QT released under? Sure, you can't, if you *choose* the GPL path! With such possible mixing, we'd have had dtrace and ZFS for Linux long back! BSD and GPL don't mix. To answer your question, based on your above cut-and-paste-from-trolltech: QT is available under multiple licenses (GPL v2, v3, and its proprietary license.) Best wishes, jaju -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
