[Development] Changes to Qt offering

[Benjamin TERRIER]

Quoting The Qt Company itslef:

Thanks for your feedback to the new online installer asking for a Qt
> Account signup. We have evaluated the feedback received via the blog,
> various discussion forums, irc and other channels. Based on all these
> comments and discussions with our partners we realize that this was not our
> finest moment.
> Preventing the growth and usage of Qt in the open source community is not
> what we want to happen. We did already see a nice jump in the number of Qt
> Accounts,
> but it was never our intention to make our valued community and
> contributors upset with us or stop using and contributing to Qt.
> *We clearly ill-calculated how asking for a Qt Account with the online
> installer would make our users feel*. A mistake. Sincere apologies.
>
[...]
> *We do hope that this eases your concerns, and that we can continue with
> your trust*.
>
>
>
> https://www.qt.io/blog/2015/05/06/changing-qt-account-to-be-optional-in-the-online-installer
>

 So apparently the trust of the QT community os nt a concern anymore...

Le lun. 27 janv. 2020 à 15:42, NIkolai Marchenko <enmarantispam at gmail.com>
a écrit :

> I am afraid I do not have other words for this model than : absolutely
> disgusting and a complete dick move. Especially login requirement for
> binaries.
> I don't even understand how distros are now supposed to keep qt code safe
> since constantly pushing qt version up is recipe for problems and there
> will be no critical bugfixes to branches that distros were stabilized at.
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:35 PM Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in the
>> future. Please check out https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-offering-changes-2020
>> .
>>
>> The change consists of three parts.
>>
>> One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS part
>> of a release is in the future going to be restricted to commercial
>> customers. All bug fixes will (as agreed on the Qt Contributor Summit) go
>> into dev first. Backporting bug fixes is something that the Qt Company will
>> take care of for these LTS branches. We’ve seen over the past that LTS
>> support is something mainly required by large companies, and should
>> hopefully help us get some more commercial support for developing Qt
>> further.
>>
>> The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required for
>> binary packages. Source code will continue to be available as currently.
>> This will simplify distribution and integration with the Marketplace. In
>> addition, we want open source users to contribute to Qt or the Qt
>> ecosystem. Doing so is only possible with a valid Qt Account (Jira, code
>> review and the forums all require a Qt Account).
>>
>> The third change is that The Qt Company will in the future also offer a
>> lower priced product for small businesses. That small business product is
>> btw not limited to mobile like the one Digia had some years ago, but covers
>> all of Qt for Device Creation.
>>
>> None of these changes should affect how Qt is being developed. There
>> won’t be any changes to Open Governance or the open development model.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Lars
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Development mailing list
>> Development at qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20200127/04287028/attachment.html>