Hacker News Reader

The 11 months old version is opensourcenand nice. The current version is for customers only. That is their current business strategy to fulfill nthe KDEnagreement, while trying to survive as business, which seems to be tough for them.

The current version (6.3, just released) is free and open source.

You must be confused with the LTS which is the commercialy supported version. And yes, if you want a commercially supported version, you have to pay. Isn't that normal?

I am fully behind it.

Don't want to pay for Qt? Use GPL.

Want to earn money from it. Use the commercial license.

No need for anti-Amazon like license.

There is also the LGPL version which allows you to still make money and release closed source.

Just look at the prices on their website.

That is only if you want to use it commercially.

That's only if you won't/can't comply with the LGPLv3

Have you ever done the math on what developer time costs? Even if Qt looks very expensive, it is cheap when you take that into account (not to speak of the savings in Qt and post-release bugfixes).

then it went un-free again...

It's source code is still released under LGPL though.

That looks extremely unfree, yes: https://github.com/qt/qtbase/blob/dev/LICENSE.LGPL3