[fc417fc802]

QT only costs money if you want access to their custom tooling or insist on static linking. We're comparing to electron here. Why do you need to static link? And why can't you write QML in your text editor of choice and get on with life?

[heavyset_go]

Some widgets and modules, like Qt Charts (or Graphs, I forget), are dual GPL and commercially licensed, so it's a bit more complicated than that. You also need a commercial license for automotive and embedded deployments.

[fc417fc802]

Right but it's a perfectly functional (even remarkably feature complete) UI toolkit without the copyleft addons.

> You also need a commercial license for automotive and embedded deployments.

How does that work? The LGPL (really any OSI license) isn't compatible with additional usage restrictions.

[heavyset_go]

You generally can't adhere to the LGPL in automotive or embedded deployments: the user can't link their own Qt libs in their auto/embedded device.

Slint has a similar license

[jenadine]

> You generally can't adhere to the LGPL in automotive

"Can't" or "won't"? The UI process is not usually the part that need certification.

> Slint has a similar license

Indeed, but Slint's open source license is the GPL and not the LGPL. And its more permissive license is made for desktop apps and explicitly forbid embedded (so automotive)

[LtWorf]

I'm guessing some parts of code are needed to make it run on those platforms and aren't LGPL.