[Interest] Individual developer license is too expensive

Ben Cottrell bencot at windowslive.com
Wed Feb 23 02:34:04 CET 2022

On 23/02/22 10:50 am, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Ben Cottrell wrote:
>> I would like to use Qt libraries that are statically linked into my binaries,
>> but the monthly license cost is too expensive, as I'm unemployed at the
>> moment.
> Can’t you use the LGPL-licenced versions? The LGPL has provisions
> for static linking that are possible to meet (if nontrivial).

Yes, I can provide at least provide object files to re-link with. At the 
all my apps are opensource so I am already compliant with the GPL and 
the LGPL.
As for closed source apps, I can only use code licensed with the LGPL, 
and provide
object files to re-link with.

> bye,
> //mirabilos

However, it would be nice to have a commercial license to be able to use 
Qt static libraries in
closed source software, and to also receive support from The Qt Company.

I will carry on statically linking Qt in my opensource applications.

Kind Regards,
Ben Cottrell

More information about the Interest mailing list