Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Aug 2009 15:07 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Permalink for comment 379651
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-07-26
With this particular project, Nokia has shown that its way of managing relationships with its corporate partners comes straight out of Microsoft's playbook. Still, it's yet one more area where Nokia gets to show off its complete lack of originality.
You weren't in the room when they were talking to riverbank and neither was I. They tried to work out a deal and couldn't agree on terms.
This doesn't seem like Microsoft at all. They tried to work out a deal, couldn't, and implemented it themselves from scratch, and released it as LGPL. In the end it is giving back to the community. If Nokia saw a benefit of releasing Qt under LGPL rather than GPL they certainly have that same benefit with any kind of bindings. Riverbank would never answer the question of whether it would change their license or not. Nokia didn't do this in the dark pretending that PyQt didn't exist.