[Development] Proposal: Remove QML from Qt's code base (OR: Should it be a requirement that Qt Modules are interoperable?)

[d3fault]

For programmers, a lot of you are pretty bad at reading. Hopefully you
understand designs better:

Current Non-Interoperable Design: http://bayimg.com/oapnKAAdJ
Which will probably eventually turn into: http://bayimg.com/oAPnpAaDj

Ideal Solution: http://bayimg.com/PaPneAadj

The sooner we get off the wrong path, the less code/resources we waste.

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:10 AM, André Somers <andre at familiesomers.nl> wrote:
>
> All talk, and no jazz. Please give up, or provide a nice demo to show
> everyone here how right you have been all along. The way you're going now,
> you're just draining energy from the community that had been better spend on
> actual development. You might as well accept it and save everyone some time
> and energy: QML is here to stay in Qt for the time being. You are not
> required to like it.
>

Convince me to work for Nokia/Digia for free, and I will. Removing the
CLA (never gonna happen) or forking would work too.


On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:15 AM,  <quim.gil at nokia.com> wrote:
> d3fault, after seeing all your posts in this list it is clear that your
> aim might be well aimed but is more obstructive than constructive.
>

Yea I hope so. My aim is to be obstructive in order to get Qt back on
the right track. Why would anyone continue to construct something
poorly designed?

> There is
> no lack of unavoidable obstacles in the road to Qt 5 launch and we really
> don't need any more - especially if they can be avoided.
>
> Can I ask you to postpone your arguments in this [Development] list
> against QML and the Qt 5 plans until 5.0 is out?
>

Hmm... is Qt one of those firm deadline projects... or is it a "we'll
release it when it's ready" project? Pretty sure it's the latter.
Delaying Qt 5 isn't that big of a deal... and it's not like there will
be a pause period after 5.0 is released. You'd say the same thing
pre-5.1: "wait until 5.1 is out to discuss this". Qt will never not be
in active development. Now is as good a time as any.



Re: the discussion about QML being modular/optional. Yes, nobody is
forcing me to use QML... but I (and lots of others[1]) still want to
use the high performance Qt Quick, which has had years of work poured
into it and is the real reason QML shines. QWidgets is outdated, I
don't get why everyone keeps saying I should stick with it. Read more
before responding please.

[1] - http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/16465/


d3fault