[Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

[Ronan Jouchet]

On 2016-10-04 10:28, Bob Hood wrote:
> Like Spiral from whence it sprung, I think Agile works wonderfully
> in certain project profiles.  However, not everybody drinks the
> all-Agile-all-the-time Kool-Aid®.  Contrary to popular religion,
> Agile is not the savior of the industry. It's another tool in the
> toolbox, not a replacement for all the other tools, and savvy project
> managers still apply the development methodology (Spiral, Agile,
> Waterfall, etc.) or hybrid -- e.g., Waterfall mixed with Agile
> elements -- that makes the most sense for the success of a project.
>
> Just applying full Agile without considering the characteristics of
> the project and its intended result is absolutely not a guarantee of
>  success.

Absolutely. But you're fighting a strawman; Jason was in no way trying
to spread meaningless Agile verbiage / kool-aid, he also explained in
detail what he meant by it. Quoting him, emphasis mine:

On 2016-10-04 10:03, Jason H wrote:
> My Agile team does two week sprints so we can reorder priorities
> twice a month. **The Qt community has no say (AFAIK) in determining
> the priority status, or what is worked on when**. The worst issue I
> know of as an example of this is the Canvas bug on iOS (
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-37095 ). It's been in there
> for 2.5 _years_, 17 votes and 36 watchers. Which in my experience is
> pretty damn high, though there are older and higher ones. Use the
> search string "votes >= 17 AND status != Closed and type = Bug" to
> get a list of that and it's brethren.
>
> Which brings up the question, **why isn't the Qt staff using a
> similar search to prioritize their backlog on a regular basis?**
>
> I think the **incorporation of a regular search of that nature**
> would immensely improve the product. I don't think there is any
> **transparency in the selected for fix criteria** ?