Qt Apps banned from Mac App Store?

**wysota** · 28th November 2010, 15:31

Originally Posted by koan

This is the Mac way; applications are packaged in bundles. It avoids DLL hell but at a cost in disk space. At least you know that installing a new application won't mean updating a library to a version incompatible with another app.

I'm not sure you are right. There is also a concept of "frameworks" and as far as I understand it that's what Qt is.

You dynamically link to the QT libs and include them in the bundle; GPL/LGPL satisfied.

No, you are wrong. GPL will certainly not be satisfied with that. But since SixDegrees meant static builds I don't see how your opinion on dynamic builds is relevant here

**koan** · 29th November 2010, 14:25

Originally Posted by wysota

I'm not sure you are right. There is also a concept of "frameworks" and as far as I understand it that's what Qt is.

Frameworks are like libraries and they can be packaged up in the application bundle. Thanks for casting doubt on my answer.

No, you are wrong. GPL will certainly not be satisfied with that. But since SixDegrees meant static builds I don't see how your opinion on dynamic builds is relevant here

I meant to say LGPL would be satisfied up to this point, but as I said the other restrictions would probably invalidate this and the possibility to try GPL. Since dynamic builds would have been feasible had this not been the case then there would have been no need to be worried about static builds.