Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th Oct 2010 22:22 UTC, submitted by vivainio
Permalink for comment 446852
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-12-26
If you use QT to create an app that you sell, then you need the commercial QT license.
If you use QT to create apps that are only used internally (never distributed outside the company, never sold to anyone, etc), then you use the LGPL license.
If you use QT to create an app that you give away, you use the LGPL license.
This is incorrect. You can use LGPL'd code in paid applications without disclosing the source code. That's the point of LGPL, as opposed to GPL.
Off the top of my head, the only ones needing commercial license are people that need to statically link to Qt for whatever reason (deploying paid apps on iPhone perhaps?). Just forget that the commercial license exists and you'll be fine.