[Interest] Help with maintenance tool

[Jason H]

> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 at 12:46 PM
> From: "Tino Pyssysalo" <tino.pyssysalo at qt.io>
> To: "Jason H" <jhihn at gmx.com>, "giuseppe.dangelo at kdab.com" <giuseppe.dangelo at kdab.com>
> Cc: "interest at qt-project.org" <interest at qt-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Interest] Help with maintenance tool
>
> On 22.9.2020, 16.19, "Interest on behalf of Jason H" <interest-bounces at qt-project.org on behalf of jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:
>
>     > Thanks, I'll give that a shot.
>     >
>     > I think the bigger problem is that if you're used an email for evaluation there is no way to select the Open Source version, it just forces you into a commercial or no license scenario. There seeds to be a license
>     > selection screen with lawyer appoved verbiage tot he effect of "I chose o use Qt in accordance with the various OpenSource Licenses including GPL2-3, LGL 2-3. In addiytion the following modules are not available
>     > under any open source license:
>     > 1 ??
>     > 2. ???
>     >...
>     > "
>     >
>     >  I can't e the only person who has previously evaluated before this whole sign-up process was made mandatory?
>
> This is fully intentional. We have business requirements, which have resulted to sub-optimal user experience.
>
> Commercial license agreement denies mixing open-source Qt with commercial Qt. In installation, this is handled in such a trivial way
> that Maintenance Tool does not allow changing the login credentials from the ones, which were used in the installation - were
> they used for evaluation, open-source or commercial usage.
>
> The simple work-around is to re-run Online Installer login page. The installer can be closed after the login with open-source credentials
> and no actual re-installation is required.

I was able to fix the problem by re-running the installer with the credentials. I also then removed the existing Qt and got the latest which should have made the install fully opensoourced.
Thanks for the hint!

> NOTE however that after this the commercial installation has been converted to an open-source installation and all open-source
> obligations apply. The better way would be to have two separate open-source and commercial installations in the first place.
> The only use case where this conversion makes sense, if you want to continue with open-source Qt after evaluation.