[PySide] PySide is Dead?
sdeibel at wingware.com
Fri Dec 14 15:34:36 CET 2012
> I've been lurking on the discussion and while I don't have much
> time/energy or practical skills to contribute in the future
> development, I find it thrilling that plans for the project future are
> being made.
> I think it's alarming, though, that the project facilities (JIRA has
> been mentioned several times) obstruct rather than support development
> work. Ensuring project momentum should be the first priority when
> picking the tools and surroundings to work in.
> Assuming that there has been no practical synergy benefits with
> sharing the same bugtracker with Qt Project, I don't see why any other
> bugtracker couldn't be used for the project (as long as someone is
> happy to take over the hosting and maintenance responsibilities). Same
> goes with other facilities as well.
> If a switch from Gerrit to e.g. GitHub would take place, however,
> that'd imply a bigger separation from Qt Project itself (due to
> licensing issues). If you want to do that, I'd warmly recommend having
> first a discussion with Lars Knoll and esp. Digia's Tuukka Turunen to
> ensure that they have no objections or alternative proposals. Digia
> might still be interested in providing commercial support or licenses
> for PySide, and moving away from Gerrit would prevent them from doing
> that. Still, even that's just a decision to be made, if the core
> contributors feel the current Gerrit setup is counterproductive for
> the project purposes. But at least discuss first with Qt Project and
Yes, this should certainly be done if a move is considered. However,
I'm not sure if the tools are really the main sticking point right now.
It might rather be a combination of the tools and lack of active
developers w/ the necessary access rights and/or knowledge to see
something through a code review.
For example, while there was a lot of general discussion on the list
recently there's been no reply that I know of to John's email about a
specific problem and proposed solution:
I see two new items in the code review system related to this:
As you can see, Hugo is still listed as a required reviewer which
presumably needs to change -- but to whom?
One idea is for people to use our experimental shiboken and pyside
repositories listed in John's email above to see if problems are found.
More information about the PySide