[Interest] QtPdf from Qt open source online installer

[Andy]

Yeah - it doesn't even make sense.

"The intention in the marketplace was to allow open-source users to use
GPL-licensed modules in LGPL-licensed Qt without GPL obligations."

But Qt PDF is LGPL, right?

"The reason why Qt PDF is not available in the installer for open-source
users is simply that we wanted to make difference between commercial and
open-source installations. It was intentional, not a bug."

Translation: Commercial users already get it, so the marketplace version
isn't for them. We couldn't force the devs to make it GPL for our benefit,
so we want open source users to pay for it even though it's LGPL.

More license games from The Qt Company. They really have no idea (or don't
care) how badly this stuff reflects on them or what damage it's been doing
to Qt

---
Andy Maloney  //  https://asmaloney.com
twitter ~ @asmaloney <https://twitter.com/asmaloney>



On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Benjamin TERRIER <b.terrier at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 18:19, Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 11:54 AM
>> > From: "Konstantin Tokarev" <annulen at yandex.ru>
>> >
>> > Isn't this done intentionally to promote commercial licenses among open
>> source users?
>>
>> Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to human stupidity.
>> -Hanlon's razor.
>>
>> For me, because there was confusion over this module's license, I
>> attribute it to that.  Which also would be the same result as applying
>> Occam's razor.
>>
>
> Well, now we know it was done on purpose:
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-87746?focusedCommentId=532011&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-532011
>
> Unfortunately, our marketplace backend does not support distributing
>> different variants of the modules. If we had the open-source version
>> available, then there would not be the Marketplace license -based version.
>>
>> The reason why Qt PDF is not available in the installer for open-source
>> users is simply that we wanted to make difference between commercial and
>> open-source installations. It was intentional, not a bug.
>>
>
> It seems The Qt Company is continuing to show love and appreciation toward
> the open source users....
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20201021/61ea733a/attachment.html>