[Development] The place of QML

qtnext qtnext at gmail.com
Wed May 16 20:31:54 CEST 2012

I am using Qt since 12 years or more... I have done a lot of work using 
qwidget, qgraphiscview, ....
I have done some small apps with qml to display media : it works very 
well ... just the animation are a a litlle bit jerky and work not well 
on very small computer ...
But now that Qt5 is here : the alpha seems very promising regarding 
performance ... and I have started a new big desktop application and I 
plan to use only Qml and it seems very promising .. I am sure that 
Quick2 is the way for new desktop application : We only need Qt desktop 
components, treeview, ... and it will rocks :)

Regarding user wishes : it's sure that we are not at the Trolltech old 
good time and at the start of Qt Nokia : in old time, we were important 
... there was poll to see what customer wants ..(I was a commercial 
customer user and I have now switch to lgpl). Now when you are ok with 
what's happen.. the only answer is :"ok, just do it"... time have 
changed :(  but in fact, I trust what Qt developer thinks that it's good 
or not... The only big question for me is "What is the Qt futur 
regarding Nokia/Microsoft Relation, Nokia Meltemi or not ..."  What is 
the commercial future that means that Nokia will continue to invest in 
the future in Qt ... I know there is the joke of the fork ... just a 
joke ... just try to imagine the resource you need to do "qml 
scenegraph" that some people don't like ... you need taleantuous 
developer to pay, infrastructure, ... it's not possible to do that as an 
hobby open source project .... Fork means nothing without money...

Le 16/05/2012 19:49, Thiago Macieira a écrit :
> On quarta-feira, 16 de maio de 2012 13.24.25, Atlant Schmidt wrote:
>>    The FOSS developers HOPE that their interests are congruent
>>    with those of the mere customers and at least in QT's world,
>>    there's some evidence that this is true for some customers
>>    but there is also mounting evidence that this is decidedly
>>    NOT TRUE for other customers, hence our current debate
>>    about QML Qt versus QWidget Qt.
> That's not exactly true. The debate isn't about QML vs QWidget. The core of
> the debate, as far as I can see, is whether there should be a C++ interface
> for making UIs with the new technology.
> I haven't seen anyone support QWidget itself in this thread. Moreover, I doubt
> most people know the challenges with enhancing QWidget further. Consider this:
> the QWidget&  QPainter imperative painting technology is Done. It's not a
> matter of taste, it's fact: graphical technology has moved on.
> Sure, there will still be some uses for QPainter, just as QWidget will remain
> there for a few years to come. That's not the point.
> But the point is that we need something new to take Qt forward and be the
> basis for the next 5-10 years. The suggestion so far is QML&  scene graph and
> with a few tweaks it could be made to suit most people's requests.
> No one has suggested an alternative.
> So I suggest we spend our energy discussing those tweaks I mention, what's
> necessary to make the technology more attractive to current developers, what
> the impact on maintenance will be, etc.
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20120516/99f7a851/attachment.html>

More information about the Development mailing list