Hi, I tried to contact Qt Sales twice now about packaging/publishing the custom text editor under GPL, without getting any answers so far. Below is the e-mail I sent to the service. Any feedback is really welcome.
-Ilyes >>> Hi, I'm a software engineer and Open Source contributor. I've been looking for a good code and text editor on Linux, that would answer my needs and I had already a prior experience working with the awesome Qt Creator, and I thought what if I could make the text/code editing component into a standalone program, so that I could use for my every day to day editing and coding activities? I just did that and actually got the program to a stable point and made it available on: http://qt.gitorious.org/~ilyesgouta/qt-creator/code-editor Now, I'd like to publish the program under GPL and package it for a distribution to make it available to the masses, and I would like to know if that's possible, and the kind of obligations that I have to satisfy, in order to do so. Following are my questions, for which I would like to get your clear answers and opinions: 1. Is it possible to release my derivative program under GPL? The said program is a cut down version of Qt Creator and some few changes in the code to make it a standalone text and code editor. I intend to use exclusively the GPL license. 2. If yes, it there any naming constraints that I should follow? 3. If yes, can I reuse the art (.png files) located under src/plugins/coreplugin/images? These include pixmaps and icons for the menus, toolbar, etc. 4. If yes, do I have to create my own logo for the program? 5. If yes, do I have to include any special mention in the "About" dialog? I had a discussion on Qt Creator's mailing-list, at http://lists.trolltech.com/pipermail/qt-creator/2010-October/thread.html#7863 , thread "[Qt-creator] QtCreator's {source editor}-based text editor :)", where I got the word to contact you guys, Qt Sales, for such an inquiry. Thanks for the awesome Qt! I'm looking forward to hear from you soon! Thanks, -Ilyes On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Ilyes Gouta <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Adam! > >> I can tell you this right up front: You can't use "Qt" in the name. >> It's trademarked, which means you need permission to use it as part of >> the name; the text of the LGPL makes this clear. > > I totally agree! OK. That was one major point in my request. > >> If you read the LGPL (which Creator is distributed under), you will >> also find that yes, you can distribute your modified version under the >> LGPL or under the GPL; you can't use any license besides those. > > I'd go for GPL actually. > >> Generally I've found that Qt Sales is the appropriate department to >> direct these kinds of questions to and they'll forward them on to >> Legal, but I think that you can get all of your answers if you just >> read the text of the license. > > Alright. I'd wait for other comments and feedback and then proceed to > contact Qt Sales. Thanks for the reference! > > -Ilyes > >> /s/ Adam >> >> On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Ilyes Gouta <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> For the legal aspect you should ask a lawyer. >>> >>> I can't afford one, even have access to. >>> >>> However, I'd *really* like to have the opinion of Nokia's employees >>> and QtCreator's developers about these items: >>> >>> 1. Is it - at all possible - to distribute this reduced form of Qt >>> Creator? In this case, exclusively in an open source form. >>> 2. If yes, do I have to rename it? Any suggestions are welcome :) I'd >>> need to do so in order to insure a proper installation on the user's >>> machine (so that files from different packages don't get overwritten). >>> 3. Is it possible to get an official confirmation from a Nokia >>> representative? Is there any procedure? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> -Ilyes >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Andre Poenitz >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 03:36:47PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I finally found some time and implemented that idea. Code lives on >>>>> http://qt.gitorious.org/~ilyesgouta/qt-creator/qt-editor >>>>> >>>>> So far, the changes actually are disabling some portions in the build >>>>> system (all the non needed plugins and supporting code) and modifying >>>>> CppTools to not depend on ProjectExplorer and SearchSymbol, etc. >>>>> >>>>> To Qt Creator developers: is it OK to name this editor qt-editor? >>>> >>>> For the legal aspect you should ask a lawyer. >>>> >>>> Andre' >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Qt-creator mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Qt-creator mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Qt-creator mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator >> > _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
