Re: Qt license

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Qt license
by superstoned on Monday 15/May/2006, @12:38

indeed. so, as most software development is done in-house - most development doesn't care at all about GPL or LGPL... and some even still pay for the support!

Related Links

·   Articles on Interviews
·   Also by superstoned
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Qt license
by LMCBoy on Tuesday 16/May/2006, @13:11

I'm not talking about GPL vs. LGPL, I'm talking about Trolltech's position that internal development can *only* use the commercial license; you are not supposed to use the open-source edition for internal-use applications:

http://www.trolltech.com/developer/faqs/190/

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Qt license
by Carlo on Tuesday 16/May/2006, @13:23

They don't say that. Read again.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Qt license
by shev on Friday 01/Dec/2006, @13:14

GOSH, please READ the article, LMCBoy!

You are making wrong claims.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"I'd like to turn all users into developers." -- Ralf Nolden
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.