[Development] Changes to Qt offering

[Scott Bloom]

Re-reading Mark's initial post.  One thing, that I had requested from the trolls almost 20 years ago.. which Ill put out there again, is a "non-developer" license that allows people who don’t develop using Qt, but the product they work on uses it somewhere, and thus its required to build.

For a large company, (or even a small company) a license that was cheaper than full license (10% or so) would make deploying Qt on large projects a much easier pill to swallow.

I had worked with (in my consultant days) many a company, that loved the Qt containers over STL, but refused to allow them into the core code.  They split the tool between core and UI, and Qt was only allowed in the UI, no public APIs at all. Simply because they didn’t want to have to pay for a license for someone to iterate over a container, or to work with a QString

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Development [mailto:development-bounces at qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Mark De Wit
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 1:06 AM
To: Qt development mailing list <development at qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Development] Changes to Qt offering

I'm guessing the Qt installer has now been updated in line with the licensing changes?  

I've just had the first developer in our team come up to me to complain that they can't install Qt.... My usual response of click the skip button appears to no longer work.  And no, I'm not going to ask 45 developers in this company to create Qt accounts, that's a non-starter... 

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org> On Behalf Of 
> Mark De Wit
> Sent: 28 January 2020 11:38
> To: Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io>; Qt development mailing list 
> <development at qt-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Development] Changes to Qt offering
> 
> I've been working really hard over the past few years to get Qt used 
> more within my organisation.  However, mandating that our 45 
> developers all register Qt accounts is a complete non-starter, especially if only 2 or 3 of them actually
> work with UI on a day-to-day basis.   For the rest of them, Qt is a tool that's
> required to build the software, the same as every other 3rd party 
> module that they're forced to install & endure.
> 
> This may well be a show-stopper for future adoption of Qt for me.  (on 
> top of Qt Widget issues/limitations that turn into blocking issues 
> which isn't helping my cause either...)
> 
> Mark
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org> On Behalf Of 
> Lars Knoll
> Sent: 27 January 2020 14:35
> To: Qt development mailing list <development at qt-project.org>
> Subject: [Development] Changes to Qt offering
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in 
> the future. Please check out https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-offering-changes-2020 .
> 
> The change consists of three parts.
> 
> One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS 
> part of a release is in the future going to be restricted to 
> commercial customers. All bug fixes will (as agreed on the Qt 
> Contributor Summit) go into dev first. Backporting bug fixes is 
> something that the Qt Company will take care of for these LTS 
> branches. We’ve seen over the past that LTS support is something 
> mainly required by large companies, and should hopefully help us get some more commercial support for developing Qt further.
> 
> The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required 
> for binary packages. Source code will continue to be available as 
> currently. This will simplify distribution and integration with the 
> Marketplace. In addition, we want open source users to contribute to 
> Qt or the Qt ecosystem. Doing so is only possible with a valid Qt 
> Account (Jira, code review and the forums all require a Qt Account).
> 
> The third change is that The Qt Company will in the future also offer 
> a lower priced product for small businesses. That small business 
> product is btw not limited to mobile like the one Digia had some years 
> ago, but covers all of Qt for Device Creation.
> 
> None of these changes should affect how Qt is being developed. There 
> won’t be any changes to Open Governance or the open development model.
> 
> Best regards,
> Lars
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development at qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development