[PyKDE] compiled vs interpreted languages and Qt

[Greg Fortune]

<snip>
> > I guess this is where my main concern lies...  By using PyQt and
> > distributing a library that allows the user to develop applications using
> > Qt, I'm clearly violating Qt's license.  It would seem this would be true
> > for *any* interpreted language and even any application that provides
> > signifigant scripting capabilities, etc....
>
> I'll try again. You are not distributing a library, you are distributing a
> package. That package includes the library. So long as that package also
> includes an EULA that states what the user is, and is not, allowed to do
> with the library then (in my opinion - and it's only my opinion) you are
> not violating your Qt license. If you want your users to be able to use the
> library to provide access to the Qt API then they need their own copy of Qt
> commercial.

Good, that would be a simple solution.  I'll contact trolltech seperately to 
make sure this is acceptable...  If anyone else is interested in the response 
(ie, what are the developer's obligations when using an interpreted 
language), let me know and I'll forward the respone when I get it.

>
> > > BTW, I have not seen any FAQ on PyQt by trolltech ... where can I find
> > > that and/or what does it say?
> >
> > Me too ;o)
>
> It's not a PyQt FAQ, it's a PyQt related question in the Qt FAQ.
>
> > For reference, check out the Qt mailing list.  Looks like this issue is
> > being hashed over yet again.  Basically, it sounds like Trolltech has
> > decided not to pursue the open source Windows Qt market.  Sorry for
> > bringing up the GPL/win32 discussion here.  I hadn't dug on the Qt
> > mailing list about the windows non-commercial license until today.
> >
> > The issue I should have raised is how does this affect interpreted
> > languages as opposed to compiled languages?  Is it even possible to use
> > Python with Qt?
>
> The FAQ answer states that it is. The other precedent that I forgot to
> mention before is that Trolltech donated a commercial Qt license to me for
> 2 successive years (up until June this year) so that I could support PyQt
> under Windows. Since June I chose to purchase my own copy of Qt as I was
> planning the commercial edition of PyQt and it would have been morally
> wrong to continue to accept the donation in that situation.

It sure does :)  That makes me feel a lot more comfortable although I'm still 
going to make sure that my obligations are fulfilled by a restrictive license 
agreement in my own products.

Thanks for clearing that up,

Greg Fortune