[Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

Kai Koehne Kai.Koehne at qt.io
Wed May 23 15:31:17 CEST 2018

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=qt.io at qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 10:21 PM
> To: development at qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing
> On Friday, 18 May 2018 18:18:02 -03 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > Just for clarification: The official source packages contain the
> > > licheck executables already. My aim is that a git checkout and the
> > > source packages we provide contain the very same content.
> >
> > I understand, but I'm asking you not to.
> Here's something that would be acceptable:
> Do create the qt/licensing repo but make it empty, or just a README file or
> whatever is necessary. This repository can live in qt-project.org and be mirrored
> under github.com/qtproject.
> In your internal infra, use a different repository branched off from the public
> one, containing the licence checker binary and anything else you may need.
> This repository should never be shared.

Well, the whole point of the exercise is to allow customers to configure Qt under commercial terms from git, so any non-shared git module doesn't help.

We can also ship licheck binaries independently of the git modules, and ask then customers to pass their location e.g. via a configure argument:

 configure -commercial -licheck /path/to/licheck  ...

then all we have to add to qtbase is the .release-timestamp file to mark the date of a release. 

This means we'll give up the goal of making the qt source package sbe just archives of the git archives though.



More information about the Development mailing list