Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Bert" == Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de writes:
Bert> ... which would make a Squeak plugin possible license-wise: Bert> http://www.qtsoftware.com/about/news/lgpl-license-option-added-to-qt
The license would never have mattered, as long as qt itself isn't included as part of the squeak distro or plugin.
And if qt *is* included, lgpl isn't broad enough for the squeak core.
So this is pretty much a non-event. Not sure why you brought it up.
It is actually relevant. If someone were to interface QT you can now write an external Squeak plugin that is LGPL itself and ship that. The in-image code utilizing it could remain under a more liberal license. The reason being that the external plugin satisfies the need for a "suitable linking mechanism" by which one could link a new/modified version of QT to an app that is being shipped using the plugin.
The whole VM plugin mechanism was specifically designed with the idea that vendors can provide proprietary plugins to be used from Squeak. It also works for LGPL - just in reverse (i.e., you can build a non-GPL application on top of the external plugin).
Cheers, - Andreas