4 ms·

If you're fine with dynamic linking, then commercial development is still very much possible (though you lose Qt Charts). The only major pain is that you have

by joshvm 10y ago

If you're fine with dynamic linking, then commercial development is still very much possible (though you lose Qt Charts). The only major pain is that you have to supply a copy of the Qt Source if requested - the pain being that a link to the official repo is not enough, you have to be in control of the code. However, I would imagine if you gave someone the option of (a) downloading from the website or (b) paying postage and handling for a disc with the same thing, that would satisfy the license.

kbenson 10y ago
Seems like there should be a company willing to handle that for you. Take $X for for specific hosting and delivery costs up to Y for particular open source projects you've listed, for Z years.
- oconnore 10y ago
  Have you heard of this sweet version control provider called Github? I hear they might provide a solution for this sort of thing, for free.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    That doesn't satisfy the legal requirements. First, that repo may go away at some point, and you need it guaranteed, and second, they aren't doing to mail you a physical copy for cost, which is also a stipulation of some of these licenses.
distances 10y ago
> you have to supply a copy of the Qt Source if requested - the pain being that a link to the official repo is not enough I don't think this this is true. My googling is now failing me as I just get results about linking of libraries, but I remember reading it's enough to point to the source if it's unmodified in your application.
- joshvm 10y ago
  http://www.qt.io/FAQ/#_Toc453700716 http://www.qt.io/FAQ/#_Toc453700716 The Qt FAQ specifically says that their copy isn't sufficient, but as you say perhaps it only counts if you've made modifications (which would make sense).
Natanael_L 10y ago
Your responsibility is to make sure they can get the code for a certain amount of time after you distributed it to them. So you can point to the origin source if you feel confident that it will remain available for long enough, and if you know you can provide an alternative way to access it if that site goes down (so just keep a local copy, and if somebody tells you that the link is broken then you just share that copy).

by joshvm 10y ago

kbenson 10y ago

Seems like there should be a company willing to handle that for you. Take $X for for specific hosting and delivery costs up to Y for particular open source projects you've listed, for Z years.

oconnore 10y ago
Have you heard of this sweet version control provider called Github? I hear they might provide a solution for this sort of thing, for free.
- kbenson 10y ago
  That doesn't satisfy the legal requirements. First, that repo may go away at some point, and you need it guaranteed, and second, they aren't doing to mail you a physical copy for cost, which is also a stipulation of some of these licenses.

distances 10y ago

> you have to supply a copy of the Qt Source if requested - the pain being that a link to the official repo is not enough I don't think this this is true. My googling is now failing me as I just get results about linking of libraries, but I remember reading it's enough to point to the source if it's unmodified in your application.

joshvm 10y ago
http://www.qt.io/FAQ/#_Toc453700716 http://www.qt.io/FAQ/#_Toc453700716 The Qt FAQ specifically says that their copy isn't sufficient, but as you say perhaps it only counts if you've made modifications (which would make sense).

Natanael_L 10y ago

Your responsibility is to make sure they can get the code for a certain amount of time after you distributed it to them. So you can point to the origin source if you feel confident that it will remain available for long enough, and if you know you can provide an alternative way to access it if that site goes down (so just keep a local copy, and if somebody tells you that the link is broken then you just share that copy).