[Interest] QML vs Electron

[alexander golks]

Am Tue, 7 Aug 2018 16:00:22 +0300
schrieb Nikos Chantziaras <realnc at gmail.com>:

> On 07/08/18 01:19, Sylvain Pointeau wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:56 PM Giuseppe D'Angelo <dangelog at gmail.com 
> > <mailto:dangelog at gmail.com>> wrote:  
> >> [...]
> >> Out of curiosity, what prevented you from going with LGPL Qt?  
> > 
> > On desktop it is clear but on mobile, there was no clear statement if we 
> > have the rights or not.
> > Seems like LGPL is not friendly with the various stores.  
> 
> It's fine on Android, since Qt for Android uses dynamic linking by 
> default. On iOS you only get static linking right now, and I'm not sure 
> if you can build Qt for iOS yourself and configure it for dynamic 
> linking, and whether Apple now allows dynamically linked iOS apps. The 
> solution of making re-linkable object files available for iOS to comply 
> with the LGPL is not suitable for everyone. And it's a useless solution 
> anyway, unless people jailbreak their Apple devices so that they can 
> sideload apps. Even though it satisfies LGPL requirements on your part, 
> it doesn't on Apple's part. So you end up in a situation where people 
> can claim that Apple does not have the right to distribute your 
> application. And that would still apply even if you used dynamic linking.
> 
> But in any case, Android seems fine when using LGPL libraries, since a) 
> Qt is linked to dynamically, and b) Android officially supports sideloading.

One could also just deliver the closed source object files for relinking.
this satisfies LGPL, too, doesn't it?

-- 
/*
 *  printk(KERN_ERR "happy meal: Receiver BigMac ATTACK!");
 *    linux-2.6.19/drivers/net/sunhme.c
 */
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20180807/c960096b/attachment.sig>