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.
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
Last edited by benalib; 12-03-2013 at 03:33 PM.
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]
Actually there is some stuff only available in the commercial edition.
But the Free Qt is already more than a sufficient toolkit (and way easier to use than GTK imho).
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
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.
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
the agreement (emphasis mine):
(Thus not necessarily excluding Wayland forever.)“KDE Window System” means the X Window System or any successor thereto as determined from time to time by the Board […].
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?“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.