Frederik.Gladhorn at qt.io
Tue Nov 12 09:15:30 CET 2019
On mandag 11. november 2019 11:31:16 CET Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Simon Hausmann wrote:
> > Am 11.11.19 um 09:10 schrieb Dmitriy Purgin:
> >> I understand that QML 2 is not going anywhere in Qt 6 but maintaining
> >> both QML 2 and QML 3 will be a burden for the developers of the Qt
> >> Framework, and I'm afraid QML 2 won't get much love after QML 3 is
> >> released. Just as it happened to Widgets, it will be in the "done" state.
> > One thing we'd like to do differently is to allow good co-existence and
> > mixing.
> So, whereas we C++ developers get to deal with all the deprecations and
> porting for Qt 6, QML developers can just stick to QML 2 forever and keep
> their code completely unchanged because you are going to maintain the entire
> old QML 2 for them???
> How is that fair?
It really isn't about fairness. This is about what's technically sensible.
People will hopefully move to QML 3. Keeping QML 2 for some time is a porting
help. It's just so much better, faster, less resource consuming, nobody should
want to stay on QML 2 for longer than they absolutely have to.
In my personal opinion, Qt is not moving fast enough in some areas, it should
be experimenting and embracing the future. Consider the other option: Qt
doesn't evolve and stays as it is, without changes. How long would it take
until it is completely outdated and not competitive any more? Sure it'll be
around for a few years, but in order to stay relevant change is needed.
I think it's all about finding a good middle ground, where users come along,
but where innovation is also embraced. It's tricky to stay compatible enough
and making porting easy, while at the same time coming up with new solutions.
I personally think for example that there should be a major release every two
years. Limited to breakage/cleanup in some areas, not the way Qt 3 -> 4 did.
> Kevin Kofler
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
More information about the Development