On Sunday 09 November 2008 20:08, Duncan Booth wrote: > So are the references to 'Qt Open Source License' on the website > misleading?
It depends on whether you assume that there's a separate license by that name. In practice, it's a placeholder for the licenses it's available under: "The Open Source Edition is freely available for the development of Open Source software governed by the GNU General Public License versions 2 and 3 (?GPL?). The Qt Commercial Editions must be used for proprietary, commercial development." -- http://trolltech.com/products/appdev/licensing However, quickly skimming that page, I can see how you could reach the following conclusion: > It seems to me that the claims on the website are very > carefully worded to say that you have to develop code under the GPL (or > other open source license), not that Qt itself is released under the > GPL, and given the additional conditions they impose I would have said > at best it is GPL + lots of other restrictions. No, the Qt Open Source Edition is GPL version 2 or version 3 (your choice) with exceptions (additional permissions) that let you link things to it that you couldn't if it was pure GPL. It it was GPL + restrictions, it wouldn't be GPL compatible (you can't add restrictions to the GPL, as I understand it). More information can be found here: http://doc.trolltech.com/4.4/gpl.html David -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
