[Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter
Tuukka Turunen
tuukka.turunen at qt.io
Wed Feb 27 18:03:46 CET 2019
Hi,
No, that is not correct understanding. Mobile is well maintained and developed further - just like the desktop and embedded platforms.
We are constantly investing to the mobile and improving it with each release. For all the new features we always aim to get it running cross-platform, including mobile, whenever possible. So the functionality of mobile grows constantly, just like desktop and embedded.
I do understand that you would like to have more of the device related items (volume control, brightness, ...) captured to a Qt API. But lack of this should not be seen as equal to lack of investment to mobile. What I wrote about it being relative easy to implement could be seen positively as well - at least I did not mean it in any way negative or insulting.
Yours,
Tuukka
On 27/02/2019, 10.19, "Jason H" <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:
So am I correct interpreting that Qt on mobile is "finished", and we're on our own? (Aside from maintenance) Your statement "often quite straightforward to capture in a cross-platform API." seems like a "let them eat cake" moment. I really think you are missing the point that these "straightforward" are anything but. Who knows Objective C and Java? Not many. Not to mention there are enough pain points in moving to another platform already. I believe the promise of cross platform Qt is at least to handle the code.
What would it take to get Qt to commit to supporting device APIs?
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 11:34 PM
> From: "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turunen at qt.io>
> To: "Jason H" <jhihn at gmx.com>
> Cc: "Bernhard B" <schluchti at gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" <interest at qt-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Like you said, different users have slightly different needs, but there are also many things common. Our focus recently has been to make sure that old and new Qt features work nicely on mobile and in making sure new mobile platforms are supported swiftly. A lot of effort was put to WinRT / UWP to be supported in addition to iOS and Android. It is true that we have not been actively extending the support for device APIs, even though these are often quite straightforward to capture in a cross-platform API.
>
> Yours,
>
> Tuukka
>
> From: Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com>
> Date: Monday, 25 February 2019 at 11.06
> To: Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turunen at qt.io>
> Cc: Bernhard B <schluchti at gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" <interest at qt-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter
>
> Tukka,
>
> I don't think that there is a single Mobile user that finds your reply adequate.
>
> It sounds like you're dragging Mobile users along. We need a specific mobile effort to add those mobile specific APIs the platform should have. Without these APIs, my organization will not be able to justify continued usage of Qt. I have to continually defend our selection of Qt. I've never spoken to someone who was happy to have to use Qt. Xamarin, Flutter, and ReactNative are what other developers want to use. I cannot expect to continue to win this fight as Qt falls behind.
>
>
> I'm not the only one. I'm just the Squeakiest wheel. I can't really justify another $1000/yr (1. that's just Indie, not Enerprise, 2. No transparent pricing) after spending $3000 on Qt.
>
> I'm begging you to add mobile APIs for:
> - Device Hardware Control
> -- Device Button Integration (volume, etc)
> -- Display Brightness
> -- Volume Control
> -- Screen Control (Full Screen/ Nav Buttons, Wake Lock)
> - Notifications (Push & Local, Desktop?) (Probably the dingle biggest pain point)
> - iOS NFC (starts at iPhone 7, iOS 10)
>
> These all might seem "not that hard", until you consider I have to do it for 3 platforms: OSX, iOS, Android, each with their own tech stack. (ObjC, JNI, Java) This is a huge pain point, considering that is the fundamental problem that Qt claims solve. Except it doesn't... on Mobile. It's not like I'm asking for bleeding edge APIs. Qt started supporting iOS & Android 12th Dec 2013 with Qt 5.2. In the 5 years since, none of the above have made it in and those are pretty basic features. Since that time there were some early iOS accessibilty additions and Android service capabilty. That's it.
>
> I'm not asking for every possible mobile API to be supported, just a 80/20. Other developers have their own needs, and I'm in favor of us together coming up with that list, and having Qt commit to the top item(s) each release. That's what I mean when I say I want a transparent roadmap for mobile.
>
>
>
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 at 3:20 AM
> From: "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turunen at qt.io>
> To: "Bernhard B" <schluchti at gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" <interest at qt-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter
> Hi,
>
> I focused mainly in the tooling and cross-platform features in the roadmap blog post. There are other items done as well – more than what reasonably fits into a post. Mobile is an area where we are making constant development, just like we do on desktop and embedded.
>
> Currently the biggest new investment goes towards tooling and 3D – both of which have some benefits for mobile as well. This of course eats some development capacity away from other things, but it does not mean nothing else would be done.
>
> Many of our desktop and embedded users also address mobile – in addition to those who address mobile only (or start with mobile). That is the beauty of the cross-platform, with a growing number of users deploying to mobile.
>
> Yours,
>
> Tuukka
>
> From: Interest <interest-bounces at qt-project.org> on behalf of Bernhard B <schluchti at gmail.com>
> Date: Friday, 22 February 2019 at 14.28
> To: "interestqt-project. org" <interest at qt-project.org>
> Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter
>
> Many thanks to Tuukka for the Qt Roadmap 2019 blog post (https://blog.qt.io/blog/2019/02/22/qt-roadmap-2019/) - very much appreciated!
>
> As the mobile part was not explicitly mentioned, I assume that it won't be a focusing area for 2019 then? :/
>
> Jean-Michaël Celerier <jeanmichael.celerier at gmail.com<mailto:jeanmichael.celerier at gmail.com>> schrieb am Fr., 22. Feb. 2019, 12:09:
> > They even included, scripts to build the app. I'm not sure you have to go quite that far to be compliant, but awesome nevertheless.
>
> You explicitely have to:
>
> LGPLv3 4. e): Provide Installation Information, but only if you would otherwise be required to provide such information under section 6 of the GNU GPL, and only to the extent that such information is necessary to install and execute a modified version of the Combined Work produced by recombining or relinking the Application with a modified version of the Linked Version. (If you use option 4d0, the Installation Information must accompany the Minimal Corresponding Source and Corresponding Application Code. If you use option 4d1, you must provide the Installation Information in the manner specified by section 6 of the GNU GPL for conveying Corresponding Source.)
>
> And the corresponding GPL part (section 6, emphasis mine) :
>
> The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. However, it does not include the work's System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are not part of the work.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 11:55 AM René Hansen <renehh at gmail.com<mailto:renehh at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2019, 13:47 Jean-Michaël Celerier, <jeanmichael.celerier at gmail.com<mailto:jeanmichael.celerier at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Cisco did it with an app that uses gstreamer (which is under LGPL) : https://itunes.apple.com/ua/app/cisco-jabber/id467192391?mt=8.
> They send it on request, with the proprietary part in a static lib (see at the end here :
> https://github.com/GStreamer/gst-plugins-good/blob/master/README.static-linking
> )
>
> That is really cool. They even included, scripts to build the app. I'm not sure you have to go quite that far to be compliant, but awesome nevertheless. Maybe someone can clarify this further. I.e. Are you responsible for providing a, or instructions for creating a, working build environment, in order to be LGPL compliant.
>
>
> Best,
> Jean-Michaël
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 6:07 PM Sylvain Pointeau <sylvain.pointeau at gmail.com<mailto:sylvain.pointeau at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Do you have one example of someone who put a LGPL app in the app store and provided the binary object files?
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 3:58 PM Julius Bullinger <julius.bullinger at gmail.com<mailto:julius.bullinger at gmail.com>> wrote:
> On 21.02.2019 15:44, Christian Gagneraud wrote:
> > Qt is free (on mobile), free as in liberty, as long as your
> > application is free, as in liberty.
> > That's basic (L)GPL rules.
> >
> > Now there's the business rules:
> > If you want your (mobile) app to be non-free (as in proprietary), then
> > you'll have to pay the Qt company for that. Disregarding the fact that
> > you want to make money or not.
>
> Please do not spread this misinformation! As long as you adhere to the
> terms of LGPL, you can create non-free, proprietary and closed apps with
> Qt (or any other LGPL library for that matter). You only need to make
> sure that the user can replace all LGPL parts with their own builds.
>
> The fact that the mobile OS's and app stores make it exceptionally hard
> to do that is not an issue with the license terms. If you find a way
> that enables the user to replace LGPL parts (for example by dynamic
> linking or by making all object files and linking instructions available
> on request), that's perfectly valid and legal.
>
> _That_ is a basic LGPL rule.
>
> https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-lesser-general-public-license-v2.1-(lgpl-2.1)
>
> https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-lesser-general-public-license-v3-(lgpl-3)
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org<mailto:Interest at qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org<mailto:Interest at qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org<mailto:Interest at qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org<mailto:Interest at qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
> _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest at qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
More information about the Interest
mailing list