Do I have to pay money?
-
@JKSH
Programs can "interact" with each other in a myriad of ways. For example, they might use sockets or files to exchange information. You can mix GPL with commercial/proprietary in this way, because everyone does it.So... why can't I/the OP provide a non-linked, on-demand dynamic library for his optional dependency features, which he does LoadLibrary/GetProcAddress-type interface to allow that kind of "interaction"?
@JonB said in Do I have to pay money?:
@JKSH
Programs can "interact" with each other in a myriad of ways. For example, they might use sockets or files to exchange information. You can mix GPL with commercial/proprietary in this wayIf the 2 components are truly independent, then sure you can "mix" them this way.
However, @Trigve's description does not sound like independent components so @Chris-Kawa's point applies.
-
@JonB said in Do I have to pay money?:
@JKSH
Programs can "interact" with each other in a myriad of ways. For example, they might use sockets or files to exchange information. You can mix GPL with commercial/proprietary in this wayIf the 2 components are truly independent, then sure you can "mix" them this way.
However, @Trigve's description does not sound like independent components so @Chris-Kawa's point applies.
@JKSH said in Do I have to pay money?:
If the 2 components are truly independent, then sure you can "mix" them this way.
However, @Trigve's description does not sound like independent components so @Chris-Kawa's point applies.
In my case the optional dependency is library used for viewing some documents, which isn't necessary altogether, because I could render the document as .pdf and use system viewer (in my case the "proprietary dependency" contains also an executable which encapsulate the library so in this case I could use the .exe instead of library and should be OK, AFAIK).
-
@JKSH said in Do I have to pay money?:
If the 2 components are truly independent, then sure you can "mix" them this way.
However, @Trigve's description does not sound like independent components so @Chris-Kawa's point applies.
In my case the optional dependency is library used for viewing some documents, which isn't necessary altogether, because I could render the document as .pdf and use system viewer (in my case the "proprietary dependency" contains also an executable which encapsulate the library so in this case I could use the .exe instead of library and should be OK, AFAIK).
-
@JKSH said in Do I have to pay money?:
If the 2 components are truly independent, then sure you can "mix" them this way.
However, @Trigve's description does not sound like independent components so @Chris-Kawa's point applies.
In my case the optional dependency is library used for viewing some documents, which isn't necessary altogether, because I could render the document as .pdf and use system viewer (in my case the "proprietary dependency" contains also an executable which encapsulate the library so in this case I could use the .exe instead of library and should be OK, AFAIK).
@Trigve said in Do I have to pay money?:
In my case the optional dependency is library used for viewing some documents, which isn't necessary altogether, because I could render the document as .pdf and use system viewer
Does this mean you've found a way to resolve the "usability issues" you mentioned before, without depending on the proprietary library/application? If so, then I don't see a problem -- You can certainly distribute a GPL app which produces PDF files and launches the system viewer (via the
Qt PDFmodule andQDesktopServicesclass, I presume?) -
@Trigve said in Do I have to pay money?:
In my case the optional dependency is library used for viewing some documents, which isn't necessary altogether, because I could render the document as .pdf and use system viewer
Does this mean you've found a way to resolve the "usability issues" you mentioned before, without depending on the proprietary library/application? If so, then I don't see a problem -- You can certainly distribute a GPL app which produces PDF files and launches the system viewer (via the
Qt PDFmodule andQDesktopServicesclass, I presume?)@JKSH said in Do I have to pay money?:
Does this mean you've found a way to resolve the "usability issues" you mentioned before, without depending on the proprietary library/application?
Usability issue is that you either use proprietary viewer with more functionality or else convert to .pdf and use system viewer. What I had in mind was that application could either use or not proprietary library (if one has a license), which should be resolved at build time. But in this case the application cannot be GPL.
-
This post is deleted!
