[ahartmetz]

The licensing bit is really trivial to summarize: It's LGPLv3. Formerly v2, so now it can't be used for free in some applications where it formerly could.

You can absolutely use it for free in any project, as long as you conform to LGPLv3.

Regarding JS: You're not supposed to write more than glue logic in JS - well, that's the practical experience. For some reason, the Qt company recommends more JS use than that.

[xpaulbettsx]

It's not though if you want to use Qt Quick

[ahartmetz]

What do you mean?

[anaisbetts]

The QtQuick compiler is only licensed for commercial use, according to their licensing page.

[slavik81]

QtQuick doesn't need to be compiled. That's just an optimization. I've never used it or needed it, though admittedly I haven't worked on massive QtQuick projects.

I think the main reason that's a commercial offering is that developers of proprietary software like shipping binaries instead of human-readable QML files.

[berti]

The QtQuick compiler is only needed if you want to optimize startup performance (by compiling assets to binary form in the build process). I've never needed it. I'm guessing you've never actually tried QtQuick based on your comment.

[beojan]

Not since 5.11.

[dakerfp]

You can use the Qt Quick without compiling though it slows the loading.

[Buttons840]

> You can absolutely use it for free in any project, as long as you conform to LGPLv3.

So you're saying there are projects where I cannot use Qt? The fact is, there exists projects that do not have the option of using Qt without paying for expensive licensing. Such projects should at least consider using Electron which might have significant non-technical advantages for them.

It is cool that what many consider to be the best commercial desktop GUI is also open source, I will admit that much. Still, we shouldn't complain too much when many projects choose to use Electron, it's licensing is just so much more permissive which is a significant advantage for many projects.

[pjmlp]

Yeah, right.

"I don't want to pay for software, so here take a bloated browser as fake native app".

[fsloth]

"Such projects should at least consider using Electron"

I don't think QT and Electron are architecturally equivalent.

[jcelerier]

> Such projects should at least consider using Electron which might have significant non-technical advantages for them.

Electron uses components that are under LGPL (Chromium for instance) so it's basically exactly the same license questions than with Qt.