3 ms·
QT seems interesting. For those like me who’ve never used QT: As long as you don’t statically link the QT libraries you don’t have to open source your entire c
by dj43nq 8y ago
QT seems interesting.
For those like me who’ve never used QT: As long as you don’t statically link the QT libraries you don’t have to open source your entire commercial application. I’m not a lawyer.
General notes about licensing
https://www1.qt.io/licensing/ https://www1.qt.io/licensing/
Comparison of licenses
https://www1.qt.io/licensing-comparison/ https://www1.qt.io/licensing-comparison/
- jcelerier 8y ago> As long as you don’t statically link the QT libraries you don’t have to open source your entire commercial application I provided a link from the FSF that shows that this is not the case just below - you can statically link proprietary apps with LGPL qt.
- dj43nq 8y ago“(1) If you statically link against an LGPL'd library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.” So for LGPL. As a commercial application developer I’m not sure I’d want to do that. I’d then have to field support requests for that object file. Still, good to know.