[Releasing] Using LGPLv3 for the pre-built binaries of Qt 5.4

Turunen Tuukka Tuukka.Turunen at digia.com
Wed Oct 1 20:39:59 CEST 2014

>Lähettäjä: releasing-bounces+tuukka.turunen=digia.com at qt-project.org <releasing-bounces+tuukka.turunen=digia.com at qt-project.org> käyttäjän  puolestaThiago Macieira >><thiago.macieira at intel.com>
>Lähetetty: 1. lokakuuta 2014 17:59
>Vastaanottaja: releasing at qt-project.org
>Aihe: Re: [Releasing] Using LGPLv3 for the pre-built binaries of Qt 5.4
>On Wednesday 01 October 2014 13:55:19 Turunen Tuukka wrote:
>> Hi,
>> As Qt 5.4 contains new items available under LGPLv3 only, I believe it is
>> best to provide also the pre-build binaries under LGPLv3 only. Using just
>> LGPLv3 in the binary installers allows us to take all the new items into
>> the release binaries, reduces complexity and risk of misunderstanding.
>Hi Tuukka, I'm not sure I understand what the problem is.
>Isn't the licence choice shown in the installer? List both licences and let
>the user know that some components are licensed under both, some only under

We are already now showing too many licenses in the accept phase. Many just click through without thinking further what their obligations actually are. It is way too many who do not respect the LGPL - and we are making matters worse if we equip the acceptance phase with many licenses accepted in one simple click.

There is no solid means of showing per component what is the license it causes the overall binary set to be with, thus having everything under LGPLv3 is the most viable option. It is easy for the users to see what is the license they need to follow. It also allows us to reduce the overall number of licenses shown by the installer.

>Making everything LGPLv3 is a no-go. If we can't solve that, I recommend
>disabling the LGPLv3 code in the mixed-licence modules and providing a
>separate set of binaries to be installed in the online installer that is

It is likely that, for example, many users of Qt for Android prefer to have the features such as styling and WebView. And many likely wish to use Qt WebEngine with their application - but selecting to comply with both LGPLv2.1 and v3 makes no sense - it is better to use all under v3.

There is always the option of building from the official source packages, in case someone really needs to use older LGPL version for their application.

What comes to adding the number of different packages, we are already quite stretched as it is. Having different binary sets for LGPLv2.1 and v3 does not sound like a viable option.



Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

Releasing mailing list
Releasing at qt-project.org

More information about the Releasing mailing list