Page 1 of 1

Selling apps using wxWindows

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:26 pm
by Hackbert
Hi!
As I like wxWindows very much, I'd like to use it for commercial projects, too. Where can I find the license? I'd like to know if it is possible to sell apps using wxWindows...

Thanks,
Andi

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:56 pm
by eros
Its packaged with wxWidgets, and yes you can.

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/wxwindows.php

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 5:48 pm
by Hackbert
But I think I have to redistribute my app under the GPL if I use wxWindows... Is that right?

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:00 pm
by eros
No.

http://www.wxwidgets.org/newlicen.htm

"The wxWidgets 2 licence is essentially the L-GPL (Library General Public Licence), with an exception stating that derived works in binary form may be distributed on the user's own terms. This is a solution that satisfies those who wish to produce GPL'ed software using wxWidgets, and also those producing proprietary software."

There's a few examples such us Dialog Blocks.

http://www.anthemion.co.uk/dialogblocks/

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:45 pm
by caseyodonnell
Exactly. This is one of many cool aspects of wxWidgets. QT windows windows licencing scheme is precisely what drew me to wxWidgets.
eros wrote: "The wxWidgets 2 licence is essentially the L-GPL (Library General Public Licence), with an exception stating that derived works in binary form may be distributed on the user's own terms. This is a solution that satisfies those who wish to produce GPL'ed software using wxWidgets, and also those producing proprietary software."

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:06 pm
by cg
You need to be really thourough with licensing. You can start at this link

http://www.wxwindows.org/newlicen.htm

You should also get yourself familiar with GPL and Lesser GPL (many links):

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html

CG

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:58 pm
by Hackbert
Did I really understand it? The binary version of an app doesn't have to be published under the GPL? This is really cool!

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 12:05 am
by cg
What I understand is, if you statically link against an GPL'd library then you have to make your source available. On linux for example you are going to have to check every library along the way to make sure you are not statically linking against a GPL'd library.

Unless I have it all backwards... :D

CG

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 12:11 am
by cg
I looked at wx and found where this was mentioned: docs/readme.txt

Snip:

However, if you distribute wxGTK or wxMotif (with Lesstif) version
of your application, don't forget that it is linked against
GTK+ (or Lesstif) which is covered by LGPL *without* exception
notice. Under Linux systems your app is probably linked
against LGPL glibc as well. Please read carefully LGPL, section 6.
which describes conditions for distribution of closed source applications
linked against LGPL library. Basically you should link dynamically and
include source code of LGPL libraries with your product (unless it is
already present in user's system - like glibc usually is).
If compiled with --enable-odbc (Unix only), wxWidgets library will
contain iODBC library which is covered by LGPL.

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 4:37 am
by Ryan Norton
Check out the wiki page about this -
http://wiki.wxwidgets.org/wiki.pl?Distr ... plications

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 7:32 am
by KaReL
On a sidenote... If you use GPL code, you do not have to release your source (as far as I can understand). You only have to release your bytecode (.obj-files in VisualC, .o in GCC-compilers), so that the end-people who want to compile it against another version of the library, will be able to do that. Or is that the lesser GPL-thing?

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 7:36 am
by Ryan Norton
KaReL wrote:On a sidenote... If you use GPL code, you do not have to release your source (as far as I can understand). You only have to release your bytecode (.obj-files in VisualC, .o in GCC-compilers), so that the end-people who want to compile it against another version of the library, will be able to do that. Or is that the lesser GPL-thing?
Nope - that's LGPL.

Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 7:38 am
by KaReL
Ah ok ;-)

Thanks