[Interest] The willy-nilly deletion of convenience, methods (was: Mixing Commercial and Open...)

[Jean-Michaël Celerier]

> A debian package would go along way to introduce people to Qt there in
the hobbyist sector, but it's a compile-it-for-yourself situation

?? http://archive.raspbian.org/raspbian/pool/main/q/qtbase-opensource-src/

kind regards,
jm


On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 3:23 PM Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:

> >
> > Even Jason's company, you remember Jason right? QML's biggest, and
> > possibly __only__, fan. Even his company dumped Qt. The medical device
> > clients I've worked for have also dumped Qt.
> >
> > It isn't the FUD that is obsolete, just the management of Qt.
>
> I'm apparently Qt's biggest fan boy? Yes, I still think Qt (and yes, QML)
> is rockstar technology. My problems aren't with the API. It's that QtCorp
> has chipped away at the LGPL license from Nokia. And the stuff I wanted Qt
> to do, it didn't, even when under a commercial license.
>
> Qt completely delivered is promise in us getting something to market, but
> when it was finally feature complete,  that something had more native code
> in it than Qt, because we were using using Qt just for the UI. Taking that
> and writing a UI abstraction to native was not that hard.
>
> Qt *could have* made that port away so much harder, but because it's
> mobile support was so lacking, it was actually quite easy once we put our
> heads in it.
>
> I'm also at a new company and I've suggested Qt up for evaluation, to
> replace the patchwork of libraries they are currently using.  We will see
> how the talks go... I doubt we will be using Qt6, regardless. Roland, what
> did those companies move to?
>
> The problems I want fixed aren't technical. It's with the project's
> direction and management. "Open Governance" has not manifest the way I
> thought it would. Filling bugs and voting for them got my issues neglected.
> The constant relicensing to, of what was LGPL, to be under GPL 3. But these
> are issues that can be fixed with the stroke of a pen, or banging on a
> keyboard for a bit.
>
> Some other inexplicable decisions are why there isn't Qt for Raspberry Pi
> as a supported platform? A debian package would go along way to introduce
> people to Qt there in the hobbyist sector, but it's a
> compile-it-for-yourself situation. Qt continues to get beat by HTML5, but
> it shouldn't. Especially giving the WebGL plugin. But there just isn't that
> effort to enable that segment. There is no grass roots support for Qt as a
> result. And with the licensing issues of late, they've ensured that there
> won't be. This means that they have to rely on and cater to the big
> spenders boys in the market.
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20210322/77d9ddb3/attachment.html>