tuukka.turunen at qt.io
Thu Oct 10 07:39:12 CEST 2019
If there is misleading or incorrect information in the website, please let us know: https://www.qt.io/contact-us/other
Open-source licensing is a complex topic, so it is always easiest to look into it case by case as it depends a lot upon what and how is developed. The qt.io website tries to give as accurate guidance as is meaningful for the generic case and without going too deep into the details.
On 09/10/2019, 22.27, "Interest on behalf of alexander golks" <interest-bounces at qt-project.org on behalf of alex at golks.de> wrote:
Am Wed, 9 Oct 2019 20:43:58 +0200
schrieb Uwe Rathmann <Uwe.Rathmann at tigertal.de>:
> Of course this information is useless for someone who wants to change
> the license - the decision for the LGPL had been made long before. It is
> about sending the message that you should not do LGPL, if you don't want
> to be banned later.
well, i'm 100% behind you. but this is not useless.
at least you know, that the qc may reject your request.
on the other side, they may not. depends.
for me, presonally, there are few reasons to go commercial.
the information on their qt.io website was ever misguiding, several years already, and seems to continue.
but i think due to the nature of the "company" (shame on you!).
so, in turn, i hope some guys on this list will get some some ideas about (l)gpl theory.
* Q: Why haven't you graduated yet?
* A: Well, Dad, I could have finished years ago, but I wanted
* my dissertation to rhyme.
More information about the Interest