-
 KDE-Apps.org Applications for the KDE-Desktop 
 GTK-Apps.org Applications using the GTK Toolkit 
 GnomeFiles.org Applications for GNOME 
 MeeGo-Central.org Applications for MeeGo 
 CLI-Apps.org Command Line Applications 
 Qt-Apps.org Free Qt Applications 
 Qt-Prop.org Proprietary Qt Applications 
 Maemo-Apps.org Applications for the Maemo Plattform 
 Java-Apps.org Free Java Applications 
 eyeOS-Apps.org Free eyeOS Applications 
 Wine-Apps.org Wine Applications 
 Server-Apps.org Server Applications 
 apps.ownCloud.com ownCloud Applications 
--
-
 KDE-Look.org Artwork for the KDE-Desktop 
 GNOME-Look.org Artwork for the GNOME-Desktop 
 Xfce-Look.org Artwork for the Xfce-Desktop 
 Box-Look.org Artwork for your Windowmanager 
 E17-Stuff.org Artwork for Enlightenment 
 Beryl-Themes.org Artwork for the Beryl Windowmanager 
 Compiz-Themes.org Artwork for the Compiz Windowmanager 
 EDE-Look.org Themes for your EDE Desktop 
--
-
 Debian-Art.org Stuff for Debian 
 Gentoo-Art.org Artwork for Gentoo Linux 
 SUSE-Art.org Artwork for openSUSE 
 Ubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Ubuntu 
 Kubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Kubuntu 
 LinuxMint-Art.org Artwork for Linux Mint 
 Arch-Stuff.org Art And Stuff for Arch Linux 
 Frugalware-Art.org Themes for Frugalware 
 Fedora-Art.org Artwork for Fedora Linux 
 Mandriva-Art.org Artwork for Mandriva Linux 
--
-
 KDE-Files.org Files for KDE Applications 
 OpenTemplate.org Documents for OpenOffice.org
 GIMPStuff.org Files for GIMP
 InkscapeStuff.org Files for Inkscape
 ScribusStuff.org Files for Scribus
 BlenderStuff.org Textures and Objects for Blender
 VLC-Addons.org Themes and Extensions for VLC
--
-
 KDE-Help.org Support for your KDE Desktop 
 GNOME-Help.org Support for your GNOME Desktop 
 Xfce-Help.org Support for your Xfce Desktop 
--
openDesktop.orgopenDesktop.org:   Applications   Artwork   Linux Distributions   Documents    LinuxDaily.com    Linux42.org    OpenSkillz.com   
 
Home
Apps
Artwork
News
Groups
Knowledge
Events
Forum
People
Jobs
Register
Login


-
- Content .- Fans  .- Knowledge Base  . 

QBall

   1.4  

Qt Arcade Game

Score 47%
QBall
zoom


Homepage:  Link
Downloads:  1340
Submitted:  Aug 14 2010
Updated:  Apr 17 2012

Description:

QBall is a simple breakout clone, available for Symbian, Android, Windows and Linux. Note that it’s primarily intended to be played on Nokia Symbian and Android smartphones/tablets, rather than desktops, but it was easy to port thanks to Qt :)

For Android and Symbian, please download from:

Android, Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.sourceforge.q_ball

Symbian, Nokia Store: Coming Soon!




LicenseGPL
Source(Source code)
MS Windows(Windows installer file)
Send to a friend
Subscribe
Other  Content  from mdwh
Report inappropriate content



-

 Missing Source

 
 by undefined on: Aug 14 2010
 
Score 38%

Hmm..
I'm missing the Source Code.
You can not move Qt's GPLv3 to CC License.
Please read http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html


Reply to this

-

 Re: Missing Source

 
 by mdwh on: Aug 14 2010
 
Score 50%

Qt is also licensed under the LGPL:

http://qt.nokia.com/downloads
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html

which, as explained, allows proprietary applications.

The files for Windows and Symbian are certainly dynamically linked. My Linux-knowledge is limited (I just compiled with QtCreator's default settings), but from what I can tell (checking with ldd, and also testing with my system Qt libraries deleted), it's dynamically linked also.

If you want the source, I can make it available. However, to the best of my knowledge this is not a LGPL violation to release Qt closed source applications.


Reply to this

-

 Re: Licenses mismatch

 
 by undefined on: Aug 15 2010
 
Score 50%

I don't know how else to say it.
Quote:

This is a non-copyleft free license that is good for art and entertainment works, and educational works. Please don't use it for software or documentation, since it is incompatible with the GNU GPL and with the GNU FDL.
Creative Commons publishes many licenses which are very different. Therefore, to say that a work “uses a Creative Commons license” is to leave the principal questions about the work's licensing unanswered. When you see such a statement in a work, please ask the author to highlight the substance of the license choices. And if someone proposes to “use a Creative Commons license” for a certain work, it is vital to ask immediately, “Which one?”

http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/floss-license-slide.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#NonFreeSoftwareLicense
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#which-cc


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Licenses mismatch

 
 by mdwh on: Aug 15 2010
 
Score 50%

That's the GPL *not* the LGPL. They are different licences. Qt is released under the LGPL, and has the crucical distinction that proprietary/closed source distribution is allowed with dynamic linking. Please read my reply above.

Also, from your own link http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/floss-license-slide.html :

"In the middle are the “weakly protective” (“weak copyleft”) licenses, a compromise between permissive and strongly protective licenses. These prevent the software component (often a software library) from becoming proprietary, yet permit it to be part of a larger proprietary program. ... The GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) is the most popular weakly protective license, and has a version 2.1 (LGPLv2.1) and 3 (LGPLv3)."

(On the more general topic of using non-CC licences, are there licences suitable for closed source freeware apps? It seems that most freeware users seem to either write their own or simply say "freeware", but I think both of these are bad - it's better to use a known licence, that's been written by lawyers. And I don't think I'm the only one to think of CC for software - e.g., http://stackoverflow.com/questions/978477/closed-source-non-commercial-license. But when GNU say CC isn't good for software, they're only talking in the context of it not being Free Software - which isn't a problem here, since I'm not claiming these apps to be Free Software, nor do I have to according to the LGPL.)


Reply to this

-
.

 Re: Re: Re: Licenses mismatch

 
 by 3electrons on: Aug 17 2010
 
Score 50%
3electrons3electrons
3electrons
Home
-
Tomasz Ziobrowski 7

3electrons
Poland, Kędzierzyn-Koźle
Last visit Jul 24 2014
0 Friends
3 Groups

More info
Send a message
Add as friend
Other contents
--

Hi
Nice game :) I have just installed it on my phone. It might be nice to play with it using accelometer :).

I have 3 cents on license - you might be right. IMHO with that you do not valid any Qt license putting it on CC.
But I am not shure if you are not braking qt-apps.org rules. Please consider moving your app to qt-prop.org or simply attach source code on any open source license ;). I have seen pepole were asked to release the code or move it to qt-prop many times here.


Reply to this

-

 Proprietary?

 
 by ssorgatem on: Sep 19 2010
 
Score 50%

Qt-Apps.org is only meant for Free Software Qt Applications.

For privative Qt applications you can post it in Qt-prop.org (propietary qt applications).

Posting closed-source applications here will only annoy you with people asking for the source code.


Reply to this

-
.

 Qt-Prop.org

 
 by Frank on: Dec 22 2010
 
Score 50%

Hi,

please move this to Qt-Prop.org if it is proprietary software.

Thanks

Cheers
Frank


Frank Karlitschek
Reply to this

-

 Re: Qt-Prop.org

 
 by mdwh on: Jan 15 2011
 
Score 50%

Source code is now available under the GPL (because someone asked for it, not because it's required by using Qt, as someone wrongly asserts above...:).

Incidentally, forgive me if I missed something obvious, but when going through the submission process I saw nothing stating the requirement for open source ("Free" can be free as in speech, or free as in beer, so is ambigious). On top of that, there's no clear link to http://qt-prop.org that I can see, so I was unaware of its existence.

Also, I wonder why it's possible to select non-Free licenses (even if Creative Commons are meant for things like graphics/sound, the Non Commercial licences are *not* considered Free or compatible with Open Source, either by the FSF or the OSI, AFAIK). So this made me think even more that it was okay.

3electrons notes that it's common to see people being asked to move applications, so presumable I'm not the only one who was unaware of this :) I wonder if the submission guidelines can be fixed or made more clear, and the list of available licences corrected? Thanks.


Reply to this

-

 Is now GPL

 
 by mdwh on: Jan 7 2011
 
Score 50%

Source code is now available (because someone asked for it, not because it's required by using Qt, as someone wrongly asserts above...:).

I'll move my other non-open source app in a moment.

Incidentally, forgive me if I missed something obvious, but when going through the submission process I saw nothing stating the requirement for open source ("Free" can be free as in speech, or free as in beer, so is ambigious).

Also, I wonder why it's possible to select non-Free licenses (even if Creative Commons are meant for things like graphics/sound, the Non Commercial licences are *not* considered Free or compatible with Open Source, either by the FSF or the OSI, AFAIK). So this made me think even more that it was okay.

3electrons notes that it's common to see people being asked to move applications, so presumable I'm not the only one who was unaware of this :) I wonder if the submission guidelines can be fixed or made more clear, and the list of available licences corrected? Thanks.


Reply to this

Add commentBack






-
openDesktop.org Facebook App




 
 
 Who we are
Contact
More about us
Frequently Asked Questions
Register
Twitter
Blog
Explore
Apps
Artwork
Jobs
Knowledge
Events
People
Updates on identi.ca
Updates on Twitter
Facebook App
Content RSS   
Events RSS   

Participate
Groups
Forum
Add Content
Public API
About openDesktop.org
Legal Notice
Spreadshirt Shop
CafePress Shop
Advertising
Sponsor us
Report Abuse
 

Copyright 2007-2014 openDesktop.org Team  
All rights reserved. openDesktop.org is not liable for any content or goods on this site.
All contributors are responsible for the lawfulness of their uploads.
openDesktop is a trademark of the openDesktop.org Team