common enough for me
For those like me who’ve never used QT: As long as you don’t statically link the QT libraries you don’t have to open source your entire commercial application. I’m not a lawyer.
General notes about licensing https://www1.qt.io/licensing/
Comparison of licenses https://www1.qt.io/licensing-comparison/
I provided a link from the FSF that shows that this is not the case just below - you can statically link proprietary apps with LGPL qt.
So for LGPL. As a commercial application developer I’m not sure I’d want to do that. I’d then have to field support requests for that object file.
Still, good to know.
no, that's tiresomely false. You can link proprietary code statically with LGPL code. LGPL does not give a shit about static or dynamic libraries because LGPL is not a language-specific license.
Right from the source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynami...
Qt is not a GUI toolkit, it's a general framework. If you only link to -lQtCore you won't have anything remotely related to GUI in your binary. For instance doxygen is built like this.