[Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter

[ich]

Well, this was my question here.
What makes you think, you violate the LGPL in this case?

>You *cannot* publish (for free or at a cost) Qt based proprietary SW
>on Google play store w/o a Qt license. It would violate the LGPL. The
>Qt license is a (costly) LGPL substitute.

>
>Chris
>
>
>
>>
>> /René
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 14:50 Sylvain Pointeau
><sylvain.pointeau at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 8:30 PM Sylvain Pointeau
><sylvain.pointeau at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Qt is free on desktop, but it is not free on mobile, which is a
>real showstopper for me and many others.
>>>>
>>>> Le mar. 19 févr. 2019 à 20:12, ich <alex at golks.de> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> Qt is free, too.
>>>
>>>
>>> I received few personal emails to ask me why am I writing that Qt is
>not free on mobile.
>>>
>>> I am sorry but this is the message from the Qt company, please show
>me one official statement that Qt is free to use on mobile.
>>> I would be really glad and finally use Qt instead of looking for
>alternatives.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Sylvain
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Interest mailing list
>>> Interest at qt-project.org
>>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest at qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>_______________________________________________
>Interest mailing list
>Interest at qt-project.org
>https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.