[Interest] Providing custom lib with static Qt modules (so no Qt dependency)

[Francesco Nwokeka]

On Tuesday 28 February 2012 20:09:18 Bo Thorsen wrote:

> Den 28-02-2012 19:36, Bob Hood skrev:
> > On 2/28/2012 10:53 AM, Bo Thorsen wrote:
> >> Den 28-02-2012 18:16, Atlant Schmidt skrev:
> >>>     All this may not apply to you if you're distributing
> >>>     Qt under the Commercial license.
> >> 
> >> AFAIR, you're not allowed to redistribute the commercial licensed Qt.
> > 
> > Um, what?  I thought that was at least part of the reason why one would
> > purchase a commercial license in the first place, so you can redistribute
> > your use of Qt in any form you like (shared or static).  The other part
> > would be support.  Am I just misunderstanding what you're trying to say?
> 
> Sorry, I should have been more precise with this (someone else already
> asked the same in a private mail).
> 
> You are of course allowed to distribute a product based on Qt, but the
> OP wanted to develop a library, which means this would be a derived
> development product based on Qt, and that's where I think the license
> stops you. Otherwise, he could sell off Qt licensed only to him.
> 
> It might be that he could make a deal with Digia to do this, where a
> commercial Qt license would be bundled, or something like it.
No deal needs to be made. The project is private and non-profit. Might even be 
going GPL for what I know.

> And here's another reason it's a really bad idea: The Qt version would
> be locked to the static build provided with the library. So if you have
> a Qt problem that can only be solved by a patch or an upgrade, you're
> out of luck. I personally wouldn't even consider buying such a product.
> Add-on libraries to Qt are fine, but you need a build with dynamic libs.
> Or get the add-on sourcecode and build the thing statically yourself.
> 
> Bo Thorsen,
> Fionia Software.