On 6/20/22 11:58 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Looks like a mistake, probably simple copy & paste one. I've submitted a
licence fix for these two files:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtwayland/+/417519
I don't own the copyright on them. Let's see what Qt Company says.
Thanks for submitti
On Monday, 20 June 2022 16:24:43 PDT Mike Rochefort wrote:
> Looking at the source, I did a quick scan of the repository to see what
> was LGPL and GPL based. Your description of the situation was pretty
> spot on, Thiago, though there are two files in the client project that
> are GPL licensed. Th
Looking at the source, I did a quick scan of the repository to see what
was LGPL and GPL based. Your description of the situation was pretty
spot on, Thiago, though there are two files in the client project that
are GPL licensed. These files are new in Qt 6.3; they don't exist in any
version of
On Thursday, 16 June 2022 15:23:02 PDT Mike Rochefort wrote:
> In terms of bundling with the rest of the Qt framework, you're saying
> just the following artifacts from a build are needed? I don't know if
> any other objects or resources from the QtWayland package are necessary.
>
> - libqwayland-
On 6/16/22 5:52 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
The Wayland *client* library API and the wayland QPA plugin, which are
licensed
LicenseRef-Qt-Commercial OR LGPL-3.0-only OR GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only
which is the same as qtbase, see
https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtbase.git/tree/src/corelib/global/qg
On Thursday, 16 June 2022 11:20:55 PDT Mike Rochefort wrote:
> Additionally, considering Wayland is becoming a core piece of the Linux
> ecosystem is there a reason why the QtWayland module doesn't follow the
> same licensing as QtBase where the other QPA plugins are provided?
The module has two p
