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

[andy fillebrown]

It is also good to remember that if one person is saying it then ten others
are thinking it.  I, too, am not happy with the dependencies added for Qt
5, and I have not been happy about it for some time.  I've bit my tongue
about it because I don't consider my opinion on the matter all that
important in light of comments like Thiago's.  My response has been, "Oh,
Windows sucks?  I must suck too because I use it.  I'm not even going to
bother bringing it up since I suck so much for using Windows."  Is this
really what Qt wants their users to be thinking and doing?





On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Bob Hood <bhood2 at comcast.net> wrote:

> On 4/10/2013 2:52 PM, Justin Ferguson wrote:
> > Support will always suck for that platform.
>
> Please don't make disturbing statements like that.  Ifthat were actually
> true,
> then it hugely discounts Qt as an option in development pipelines, whether
> or
> not it provided commercial support.  I would not go to my team and
> champion Qt
> on the project, knowing that "support will always suck for" Windows.  We
> use
> Windows/Visual Studio as our primary development platform, and then
> build/tweak on OS X (and probably Linux, before long).  AFAIK, only one
> person
> on my team uses OS X as his primary development platform.
>
> My problem is that the introduction of Perl to the build process breaks the
> out-of-the-box nature of Qt.  All I required before was the compiler/IDE
> environment that I would have already been installed anyway for me to be
> able
> to use Qt in the first place.  Now, Perl is on my system just for one
> aspect
> of building Qt, and it is of no further use.  Awkward design.
>
> Look, I understand it's OSS, and I also understand that Thiago (like many
> others) is a volunteer, and it was not my intent to attack him or his
> contributions in any way.  I'm simply concerned by a growing tendency I am
> seeing in the industry as a whole as OSS becomes employed to a greater and
> greater degree commercially.  I've seen some OSS projects have an
> "it's-good-enough" attitude, which is fine when it stays within the OSS
> ecosystem, but when it gets into commercial endeavors, it can be very
> frustrating to depend on, or, in some cases, even fatal.
>
> I always had the impression that Qt's developers held themselves to
> somewhat
> higher standards for an OSS project.
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20130410/f87b5b74/attachment.html>