[Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

[Bernhard]

I consider a fully functional web engine component a very important piece of Qt.
Easily embedding a website into a desktop application is extremely useful. Example applications are scrapers and website analysis tools. But there are a LOT more applications. Also more common ones.

If the choice is dropping the web engine component or dropping old compilers I wouldn't need to think a second about the decision.

-- 
Kind Regards
Bernhard Lindner

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: development-bounces+private=bernhard-lindner.de at qt-project.org
> [mailto:development-bounces+private=bernhard-lindner.de at qt-
> project.org] Im Auftrag von André Somers
> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Februar 2015 08:43
> An: development at qt-project.org
> Betreff: Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5
> 
> Knoll Lars schreef op 5-2-2015 om 16:28:
> > But we don’t have much of a choice, if we want to deliver an up to
> > date web engine.
> Perhaps it is time to ask the question then: do we want to do that? Do we
> really need to?
> 
> It seems to me, that it isn't really possible to do. Not in a way that doesn't
> require huge effort in support or pissing off everybody not on one of the
> large main stream platforms. And the question might be: why should Qt
> deliver an up-to-date web engine exactly? Do we really think that people are
> going to use Qt to build advanced browsers? Sure, some might (KDE comes
> to mind...), but you are right in your observation that the technology is
> moving too fast and is developed between giants like Google, Apple and
> Microsoft who could not care less about other uses or other platforms than
> their own.
> 
> All the while Qt is spending effort to catch up, deprecating compilers and
> platforms because they can't take the latest Javascript engine to it, users are
> hapily using browers like Firefox and Chrome.
> 
> Perhaps it is time to conclude that Qt just can't compete in this race if it
> doesn't want to be crushed between the giants playing this field.
> Perhaps it is just time to settle for indeed a simpler goal: don't try to provide
> a fully integrated full-fledged web engine, but instead settle once again for a
> simpler alternative that we _can_ support and that can be used for things like
> showing embedded help or showing simple sites, and perhaps an API to
> wrap and embed the native web view provided by the platform but with
> limited integration.
> 
> André
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development