


Screenshot Tools by DOOMer 26 comments
" -- your statement is incorrect since Qt now may be used as LGPL. Yes, if the author wishes his code to be GPL, he needs to provide source, however if he were to choose some other license for his work, he would no longer need a commercial license for Qt to do so. This changed at Qt 4.5 I think. - Oct 30 2009

Screenshot Tools by DOOMer 26 comments
When using LGPL, you never have to release source code to your own app. The only source you must release: IF you modify the LPGL code, then you must release your modifications.
Furthermore, QtCore4.dll is not a static library, it's a dynamic one. If he released binary-only, this means you are still able to use any QtCore4.dll you wish and still use his app with it -- as long as he has not made modifications to the dll that are required for his app to run. This is why he has no compulsion to release his code (again, assuming he has not modified the library -- and then he only must release his library modifications under the LGPL). - Oct 29 2009

Screenshot Tools by DOOMer 26 comments

Developers Apps by aurelienrb 5 comments
- Nov 04 2008

Developers Apps by aurelienrb 5 comments
What leads to this error? If I copy a file (or more) from an open source Qt path, I can convince CuteBuilder to run against my commercial source, or will there be other issues? - Nov 04 2008