[Interest] Oops! Somebody's got a bad case of dependency bloat!

[Scott Aron Bloom]

Has anyone anywhere considered using the "Perl->C++" conversion tools to create the executable?  Just like Qt ships the configure.bat ship it as well...

Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs.com at qt-project.org [mailto:interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs.com at qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael Jackson
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:42 PM
To: interest
Subject: Re: [Interest] Oops! Somebody's got a bad case of dependency bloat!

As much as I just went off the deep end on Thiago let's look at it from the Qt devs point of view. Say they really do want to get rid of the perl thing and rewrite what the perl script did in C++ so it can be compiled during the configure process like qmake.

Who actually is going to step up to do this? Who has the time. I bitch and complain but I certainly do NOT have the time right now. I have paying customers that are demanding my attention not to mention family life. So then we turn to Digia to get it done. But they will not without a _Paying_ customer to foot the development costs. And no one here is going to foot that bill. 

BUT...

 What if we took this to a "Kickstarter" like process. if those of us who want to get rid of Perl are willing to cough up some money I bet we _could_ foot the bill to make the conversion from Perl to C++. Who we get to do it is up for discussion. There are more than a few Qt Devs that need the extra work.

Just food for thought. (Trying to help find a solution instead of just bitching...)
---
Mike J.

PS - Yes I top posted. Want that to be read.

On Apr 10, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Justin Ferguson wrote:

> >And yes: The best way would be a >mail to the commercial support...
> 
> I've always had a severe distaste for those sorts of arguments that 
> turn OSS/FS into a form of semi-crippled shareware where if i want it 
> to work i have to pay; which often enough turns into "travel 
> insurance": insured against all the reasons you probably wont miss 
> your flight (acts of god v. Lost taxi driver)
> 
> On Apr 10, 2013 3:25 PM, "Christian Dähn" <daehn at asinteg.de> wrote:
> > On 04/10/2013 10:05 PM, Michael Jackson wrote: 
> > > 
> > > And just because a "majority" download the installer does not mean "ALL". It is YOUR JOB AS A Qt DEVELOPER/MAINTAINER to make MY life easier. That is your job. 
> > > 
> > 
> > I think you made a mistake and sent this email to an opensource 
> > project's mailing list instead of to your Sysadmin.
> 
> In this special case he is right because he addresses Thiago (who works for Digia and is partly responsible for the problems we commercial customers have to suffer with the new Qt 5 policies).
>  
> And yes: The best way would be a mail to the commercial support... 
> 
> But: Even the commercial support currently does nothing else as just 
> creating a public issue in the Qt-Project bugtracker ;-)
> 
> Currently commercial customers more and more are less important and have the same priority as any user of the opensource releases... sorry, my experiences especially in the last weeks...
>  
> Sadly  none of the devs at Digia seems to have experiences with IT and project structures of industrial and enterprise structures / companies - that leads to such biased discussions... like a fight between commercial (Windows) customers and the Qt devs (Linux/Mac users).
> 
> ciao,
> Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest at qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest