Slávek Banko wrote: Yes, I also think so. I was on their meeting in Vienna last year, where they presented also their different licensing models. But for the main part it remains open (see KDE), however many goodies are subject to restricted licensing and payments :/ (which is somehow understandable, but ...) I wonder how humanity could do this - looking back where everything was in the year 2000 and where we are now, I can only say it is a pity - less choice, less freedom, ideology rules together with some crazy people and the nuclear clock is only 100sec before the final judgment :/

Yes, it is very good that Trinity has its own maintained TQT3 fork of QT3, though not so much for licensing considerations, but so it works correctly with Trinity. The free license of QT3 wouldn't change. I scoffed at the QT "offering changes" but read through the way the news was presented on various sites, and realized that this wouldn't affect us on Linux one bit. Distros don't generally don't use the LTS releases of QT for Plasma. (I don't do Plasma anyway, I have none of that messiness installed... I only do a standalone build of QT5 for a few applications. I use only Trinity, with fluxbox to fall back on (e.g. to work on Trinity :-) As for the binaries, that's more for the Windows platform that it would matter. Who would use QT binaries from them on Linux. On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 1:13 PM Slávek Banko <slavek.banko(a)axis.cz> wrote: