Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 14.04 Looks Toward Qt 5.2, Qt Mir In 14.10

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ubuntu 14.04 Looks Toward Qt 5.2, Qt Mir In 14.10

    Phoronix: Ubuntu 14.04 Looks Toward Qt 5.2, Qt Mir In 14.10

    Ubuntu 13.10 shipped with Qt 5.0 instead of Qt 5.1, since while it was available for months prior there were some "unfixed regressions" in the newer tool-kit release. With Qt 5.2 being right around the corner, Canonical is looking to switch to the newer open-source tool-kit release if there isn't as much fallout...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTUyMDY

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Ubuntu 14.04 Looks Toward Qt 5.2, Qt Mir In 14.10

    Ubuntu 13.10 shipped with Qt 5.0 instead of Qt 5.1, since while it was available for months prior there were some "unfixed regressions" in the newer tool-kit release. With Qt 5.2 being right around the corner, Canonical is looking to switch to the newer open-source tool-kit release if there isn't as much fallout...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTUyMDY

    Poor Gnome, poor GTK3...

    First Unity replacing parts of Gnome, now Canonical is depending more and more on Qt...

    What's going to happen to the GNU Network Object Model Environment?

    Are they still capable of "fighting" against Qt and KDE? Or are they going to make agreements in Freedesktop form and standarize more stuff like GVFS/GIO vs KIO?

    Comment


    • #3
      I forgot to add a link, damn 1 limit limitation ruined it...

      Kill KIO (was: Repositioning the KDE brand)

      Things need to change, Linux is still a damn mess.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by timofonic View Post
        Poor Gnome, poor GTK3...

        First Unity replacing parts of Gnome, now Canonical is depending more and more on Qt...

        What's going to happen to the GNU Network Object Model Environment?

        Are they still capable of "fighting" against Qt and KDE? Or are they going to make agreements in Freedesktop form and standarize more stuff like GVFS/GIO vs KIO?
        Qt seems to be a better framework for cross platform application development and mobile . No brainer then

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
          Hopefully Gnome will die. Linux needs only one toolkit. Anyways, nice progress from Canonical. Always thinking one step ahead.
          And controlled by one corporation, Digia.

          Their open governance is a joke, like the one about WebKit. And look at what happened, Google forked the fork and made BLINK

          Maybe they are always thinking one step ahead, but to themselves and contrary to the Free Software ecosystem.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
            Hopefully Gnome will die. Linux needs only one toolkit. Anyways, nice progress from Canonical. Always thinking one step ahead.
            The problem isn't the toolkit, but the lack of standards and application development being ruined by toolkits. You develop software on one toolkit, then you are trapped by their ways (and it seems difficult to separate GUI from the rest of the code in toolkits like Qt).

            Both KDE and Gnome projects are tainted by seldom attitudes, but other DE suffer the same problem too.

            Comment


            • #7
              let's get the fact: gnome is controlled by Red Hat behind the curtin
              kde is more independent then red hat's DE
              kde uses Qt which is a full framework; GTK is a simple tk and it is useless without gnome controlled libraries (GLib, GFVS,GIO, etc)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Honton View Post
                Yeah. The Qt CLA is the last piece missing before the entire Canonical stack can be closed. It must be nice for Canonical to have a toolkit offering this. Who needs freedom anyway..
                What kind of freedom are you talking about?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Honton View Post
                  The kind of freedom where free licenses matter, not CLA ones.
                  Both, Canonical's stack and Qt, are licensed GPL and LGPL. I guess you wouldn't call that unfree licenses, would you? Also, how do you think Canonical or Digia could close down (L)GPL licensed software?
                  Once again you are talking out of your ass, without any expertise on the topic you chose to post about. Do for one time something useful and help in the development of [INSERT FAVORITE FOSS PROJECT HERE] instead of annoying people on Phoronix with your shit.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Honton View Post
                    The kind of freedom where free licenses matter, not CLA ones.
                    Ah, the freedom for developers to close source software ... *That* freedom

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                      Both, Canonical's stack and Qt, are licensed GPL and LGPL. I guess you wouldn't call that unfree licenses, would you? Also, how do you think Canonical or Digia could close down (L)GPL licensed software?
                      Once again you are talking out of your ass, without any expertise on the topic you chose to post about. Do for one time something useful and help in the development of [INSERT FAVORITE FOSS PROJECT HERE] instead of annoying people on Phoronix with your shit.
                      You should be banned, using pejorative language. Who are you to insult that way?

                      Do you have any idea of the possible implications about CLA? In theory anybody can fork it, in practice few have the developers' army to maintain that monster code Qt is. And about Canonical stuff, they pretty sure do their homework to look nice to the mainstream and hide their dirty work (anyway, they already have mercernaries inside Debian governance).

                      The same is about CUPS, they use a CLA too. And they take advantage of it, bundling extra stuff only for MacOS X.

                      The problem seems to be that technical people often lack the understanding of (micro)politics in technology projects.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by timofonic View Post
                        You should be banned, using pejorative language. Who are you to insult that way?
                        Honton is a notorious troll who will say anything, even blatantly lie, to trash any DE other than Gnome. He has a handful of talking points he uses to derail any thread even remotely related to any DE other than Gnome into a flamefest.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          honton...

                          I can not await the moment honton states again that kde is dying because it looses so many developers.... please Honton - would you make this statement again?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Honton View Post
                            No! The upstreams are owned or licensed to Canonical and Digia. You are confused about this because you can download a GPLed downstream version for now. Ask your self why the demand CLA.
                            Again, you are talking out of your ass without any expertise on the topic. You should better stop before showing more people how pathetic you actually are.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Honton View Post
                              You need to lighten up. Qt will turn to Canonical to get promotion on the linux platform, Ubuntu is way bigger than KDE. KDE will be less important to Qt unless KDE gets down on the knees for Mark as well. Accepting Qt's CLA is no different than accepting Canonical's CLA.
                              Reading this, you must have insider knowledge of Digia. May it be possible that you are just a frustrated employee of Digia, blasting your frustration all over the web in a childish attempt to denounce your employer?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X