mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[David Allouche <address@hidden>]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 03:05:30PM +0200, Pierre-Henri Jondot wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2003 14:19:27 +0200
> David Allouche <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > But distributing the resulting binary is illegal. What this mean
> > is that only the person who actually compiled the executable can
> > use it. Otherwise, the person who compiled the executable and
> > distributed it is in violation.
>
> That is very weird... I have read and re-read the licensing terms of qt,
> commercial edition, and didn't read anything of the sort... (If they have
> such a restrictive licence, they won't sell many licences I suppose)

This is not a feature of the Qt license, but a feature of the GPL.


> But do you know there is a qt non-commercial edition for windows too ?
>
> see there : http://www.trolltech.com/download/qt/noncomm.html
>
> But this edition is not up-to-date (version 2.3 of qt right now, whereas qt
> free edition is >= 3.1), is binary only and demands microsoft visual studio
> compiler so it might not be the panacea...
> 
> And of course the GPL licence in that case might have to be appended.

Exactly. Qt non-commercial is not compatible with the GPL. All source
code must be relicensed by the copyright holders under a new license
which includes a specific exception.

And basically, Qt non-commercial is also non-free. This is the very
essential problem of making free software dependent on non-free
software, thus making the whole work non-free.

-- 
                                                            -- ddaa