You will need a subscription license to access Qt 6 (non-LGPL) | Hacker News Reader

You will need a subscription license to access Qt 6 (non-LGPL)

qt.io

32 pointsdeng12 comments

Open articleView on HN

While true, this applies to the commercial licenses - https://www.qt.io/faq/tag/qt-commercial-licensing

But not to the open source ones.

Helpful. May I suggest altering the title to reduce the click-bait or false alarm rate.

Simply add at the end: " (non LGPL)"

Even if the following only applies to the commercial license, I find it kind of insane:

"Can I continue to distribute my application after my commercial license has expired?

No. You are not permitted to further distribute your applications."

Qt for Application Development = $233/mo. with 3-yr. prepayment of $8,400. $330/mo. with annual payment of $3,950

Farewell Qt. I guess I will not be recommending to start any Qt project in my company under these conditions.

I think this means that you will not be able to purchase perpetual commertial licenses for Qt 6 as you could for version 5; only the subscription option will be provided.

I don't think this is to be interpreted that you won't be able to access the LGPL version without a license; but then again, who knows, maybe they'll stop providing builds? Qt is pushing really hard on commertial licensing lately.

This is correct, but this is a huge change to people who depend on the commercial license. I think this means that you will need a subscription for as long as you're distributing the commercial (i.e., non-LGPL) Qt6 with your application.

Well you can get it for the low price of 4k$ per year per developer, or even as discounted as 8.4k$ for three years by paying a lump sum in advance. As long as you don't distribute devices containing Qt, in which case you (also?) pay per device.

This is horible for security. Imagine a piece of software stops being supported, and the developer doesn't renew their licenses. When a security bug is discovered, the dev is powerless. They can't release a new version, even though they have the source code and could fix the bug.

To clarify: This is for the commercial usage of Qt6, the LGPL version of Qt6 will continue to exist, but you won't be able to buy a perpetual commercial license of Qt6, everything will move to the subscription model.

Someone mentioned JavaFX as an alternative, but was quickly flagged to death. Could someone explain would would be advantages/disadvantages of such a move in 2020? It's been years since I've looked at JavaFX, and I'm not siure how it compares to Qt6, feature- and license-wise.

Somewhat-tongue-in-cheek: It's been years since anyone looked at JavaFX. It's been debundled from the JDK because it never really took off the ground.

Feature-and-license-wise it might be a reasonable choice, but it would be like selecting Silverlight.

What a weird headline

https://code.qt.io/cgit/

Is not changing at all.

What's the URL for Qt6 open-source code?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com