Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 65

Thread: Qt 5.2 Final Release Is "Coming Really Soon"

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    KDAB is lying. Qt can't be relicensed to BSD. It is only Qt Free Edition.
    I don't think this case is lying in the sense of conveying something that isn't true.
    For the context of Qt on Android the two concepts cover exactly the same code.

    So while this is a simplification it doesn't make any difference in the context discussed by the blog entry as far as I can tell.

    Cheers,
    _

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Instead of making assertions please answer the question.

    Does KDE gain the right to relicense the commercial Qt or the just the GPL/LGPLed version for some linux versions and Android?
    there is no any difference between commercial and GPL'ed releases

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    KDE users being confused about Qt vs QT Free Edition is a reality, yes. But what do anyone gain from all the lying? The reality is KDE have NO power over Qt. RTFA(greement).
    everyone -not only kde- has the right to fork Qt right now and redistribute it under the GPL/LGPL. And if there are differences between Qt commercial and free (which is NOT true) who cares?
    free software apps use GPL'ed Qt anyway
    btw windows has a LGPL/GPL release which is identique to Qt "commercial" it's the same code with triple license
    see /qt5/licenses/
    Last edited by benalib; 12-03-2013 at 03:33 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Instead of making assertions please answer the question.

    Does KDE gain the right to relicense the commercial Qt or the just the GPL/LGPLed version for some linux versions and Android?
    qt-free is for the past releases like Qt1,2,3,Qtopia,qtjambi,etc when trolltech had different source repositories for OS and licenses[i explained this to you like 7 times already]

    since Qt4 nokia simplified all into one big all plataforms GPL repository[except ultra closed platforms like VxWorks that demanded no GPL version for them EVER, or so i heard] and then they just picked up code from that giant repo to compile their commertial versions. <---- at this point the whole qt git tree became GPL hence protected by GPL and by the agreement as Qt-free or gpl version

    since digia took control and qt5 came, they took the complete git repos of qt4 era and simplified them even more through QPA[project lighthouse], making only 1 tree will all the common code and the OS specific parts goes into small plugins, additionally the tree was moved to qt-project.org and given open governance, ofc still 99% of the code of all platform still in GPL and is still reffered as qt-free hence protected by license and agreement equally[except the normal always closed platforms like vxworks].

    and again digia/kde/superman/your mom cannot remove the GPL license of files already in the repo, the agreement applies only to future code that is not in the repo already[7 times already too] or old code that never was GPL to begin with[again only certain OS versions of Qt1,2,3,Qtopia,Qtjambi,etc]

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bordeaux, France
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Actually there is some stuff only available in the commercial edition.

    http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2013/0...erprise-users/
    http://qt-project.org/videos/watch/q...-and-functions

    But the Free Qt is already more than a sufficient toolkit (and way easier to use than GTK imho).

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
    Actually there is some stuff only available in the commercial edition.

    http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2013/0...erprise-users/
    http://qt-project.org/videos/watch/q...-and-functions

    But the Free Qt is already more than a sufficient toolkit (and way easier to use than GTK imho).
    yeah and pretty much is digia in house development as an extra sugar, which i find very good because there is nothing more worrisome than a company that never uses their own tools

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Does KDE gain the right to relicense the commercial Qt or the just the GPL/LGPLed version for some linux versions and Android? Please answer.
    Qt 1,2,3,Qtopia for windows/OSX/other minor platforms -- Linux/X11 was GPL so no change is needed

    Qt5+ code that is pending merge into the repository which don't specify clearly a license[if it is GPL don't apply]

    the code already GPL'ed in the git repo cannot be changed unless every developer that ever contributed to QT allows it[same situation as the kernel], the CLA only allows add 1 additional license[digia commertial license] to the same code never remove one since is illegal

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Does KDE gain the right to relicense the commercial Qt or the just the GPL/LGPLed version for some linux versions and Android?
    what do u mean by some linux versions and android?
    Qt is under LGPL/GPL for windows mac linux and android and everyone is permitted to use modify redistribute it under the LGPL/GPL ONLY
    but KDE has the exclusive right to relicense the whole Qt framework for (win/linux/mac/andoid) under the BSD or any other open source license if digia fails to fulfill its obligations
    Last edited by benalib; 12-03-2013 at 04:09 PM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    RTFA(greement)! It is clearly stated in the agreement that "Qt" is defined as "Qt for KDE X window system(Wayland excluded) and Android. The subset of "Qt" only licensed for GPL and LGPL is defined as "Qt Free Edition". You failed at understanding the very basic of this agreement. You are as confused as many other KDE users.
    ok, ill try to simplify, KDE[distros, etc] and digia build their releases from the same git repo, digia only modify the header files of the commertial version to add their specific license and in worst cases they backport certain patches for their clients that normally were nuked from the base repo[and breaked the abi in some obscure cases]. this means the concept of commertial and free repos are not valid anymore, and since that git repo is already GPL there is no need for the agreement since it will always be GPL forever nor KDE nor digia nor anybody can change it without every living and dead developer approval.

    the agreement exists only to protect previous releases of the toolkit from the age those were phisically separated and with different licenses per OS or the case digia holds hidden code that is not GPL and in the repos already by the time of an breakage. for example if digia develops in house a patch that make qstring[core Qt part covered by the agreement] 5x faster in 2016 they are forced to give it to KDE by the agreement and KDE can merge it into qt project git with any copyleft license they choose, assuming digia wants to go closed in 2016 and send the finger to everyone else

    clear enough??

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    RTFA(greement)! It is clearly stated in the agreement that "Qt" is defined as "Qt for KDE X window system(Wayland excluded) and Android. The subset of "Qt" only licensed for GPL and LGPL is defined as "Qt Free Edition". You failed at understanding the very basic of this agreement. You are as confused as many other KDE users.
    All right, if you stupidly insist, let’s quote the agreement (emphasis mine):

    “KDE Window System” means the X Window System or any successor thereto as determined from time to time by the Board […].
    (Thus not necessarily excluding Wayland forever.)

    “Qt Free Edition” means Qt, together with all the API documentation available for Qt related to the classes and other components distributed with Qt, as made available to the public as large under the Qt Free Edition Licenses.
    Now, let’s answer your question: yes, KDE can only relicense the LGPL version of Qt on desktop Linux and Android. What’s your point?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •