Problems with Open-Source Downloads read https://www.qt.io/blog/problem-with-open-source-downloads and https://forum.qt.io/post/638946

WIP: Qt Quick, OpenGL & Mobility for iOS





  • nice!



  • Really nice! =)



  • CLONE!



  • [quote author="SumWon" date="1289673686"]"Qt Quick on iOS":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjYJdi48B8Q
    "Qt OpenGL on iOS":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv25DV16DO4
    "Qt Mobility on iOS":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL_6a5Zwpb4
    "Qt Quick on iOS 'Retina Display'":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM_QXut3rj8[/quote]

    SumWon, is it in progress in the "Qt-iphone repo":http://qt.gitorious.org/+qt-iphone/qt/qt-iphone-clone or in other repo?



  • This is an iOS plugin for Lighthouse and is done with the aim of getting Qt onto iOS as quickly as possible (the Qt Quick demo video was taken 1 week after work on the project was started).

    This is in contrast to the Qt-iphone project which aims to make Qt "a glorified wrapper for Cocoa Touch" (by attempting a 'native' port of Qt to iOS without using Lighthouse).

    The goals of the two projects are completely different. This port's aim is to allow Qt (and Qt Mobility) apps to be built for iOS without modification (all videos have been done with unmodified Qt example apps*), whereas the Qt-iphone project's aim is to be able to use Qt to write iOS applications.

    No reference to the Qt-iphone project's source code has been made for this project. The source code for the iOS plugin for Lighthouse is not currently publically available, and it is currently being developed with a commercial Qt license.

    *static plugins have been used which require the adding of a header file to the file containing the project's main() function.



  • Is there any chance it will be available as open source at some time?



  • No decisions have been made on what license might be applied to this work as yet.

    In any case, those decisions won't be made until such time as Qt 4.8 is released (and "Lighthouse" becomes an official Qt platform), as software developed with the "Technology preview" license (which this is using) can't be distributed at all.



  • I've posted this on other forums, but the common misunderstanding is that static linking is prohibited under the terms of the LGPL, it is not.

    Section 6a provides a provision which allows static linking provided that the developer provides (binary) object code, or an offer to do so for a period of 3 years, which may be re-linked with the LGPL components.

    Regarding app bundle signing restrictions, these are prohibited by the GPL, but the LGPL allows you to distribute under "...terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications."

    If those terms comply with 6a, i.e. that you provide access to unsigned object code in a form which may be relinked, modified for the users own use etc., then there doesn't seem to be a conflict.

    6b specifies dynamic linking, but it is only one option in section 6.

    Whether 'permitting modification' refers to the actual app bundle, or the components provided under 6a is to my mind an open question. If it were so, then 6a would be invalid regardless. The prerequisites for doing so would be an apple developer account and apple's tools / hardware etc, but under the terms of the LGPL and GPL, the developer is not required to provide these.

    Of course this isn't legal advice.


Log in to reply