Hi Matthew,
I have tried to be very clear in explaining that the whole point of this email
thread is about mixing open-source and commercial, which not a the most common
use case. I do not know what are the questions that I have tried to avoid
answering. Yes, there are many users of Qt who use it in many different ways.
It is rather simple to answer for every specific case when all details are
known, but rather hard to give a short answer that covers every possible way of
using Qt.
But trust me when I say that the vast majority is using either the commercial
or open-source version. In both these cases licensing is rather
straightforward: either follow LGPL and GPL (if you use the GPL parts), or the
commercial license if that has been purchased.
I know licensing in general can be a challenging topic, but I can't help
thinking if some people are intentionally trying to twist things around. At
least there are quite many who have not been talking about this in a friendly
tone.
That said, I hope there are at least some recipients in the mailing list who
consider this discussion valuable. Unless there is any new actual question,
this is my last email to the topic.
Yours,
Tuukka
On 1.4.2020, 23.04, "Matthew Woehlke" <[email protected]> wrote:
On 31/03/2020 09.46, Andy wrote:
> Even a solo developer needs to hire a lawyer before touching anything
> Qt-related.
Fortunately for the OSS community, you forgot "commercial" in that sentence.
> Once you start trying to codify all the different scenarios in your
> licensing, it becomes toxic and people will avoid it
Yup. Just in this thread, I've seen messages *from Tuukka* that said
"yes", "no", and avoided answering in various ways.
It's no wonder people are confused.
--
Matthew
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
