Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt 5.0 Beta Likely Coming In Early August

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

  • #16
    N
    Originally posted by ShadowBane View Post
    Maintaining Qt wouldn't be particularly more work than maintaining glib, which the Gnome community seems to have no trouble doing. The fact that nokia funds development for Qt is really just icing on the cake.
    Maintenence isn't the issue (though I think it would be stretching the kde devs to continue supporting as many platforms as they do) it's the new development that has to happen that's the potential problem. According to the qt wiki on the new governance model, the assumptions had been that nearly all code was contributed by either the owners of QT or contractors. If that was the case then the community doesn't have a history of significant code contribution, let alone serious new development that qt has been known for.

    Comment


    • #17
      Exactly what liam said. The chart example above is just a preview of what can happen.

      Qt open won't be very useful if all the new features are commercial only.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by curaga View Post
        Qt open won't be very useful if all the new features are commercial only.
        That is legally impossible. Most new features need to be integrated into Qt proper, since they will involve modifications to the existing code. This is why pretty much all of Digia's work is part of the open-source Qt release.

        If you are really concerned about a single add-on for Qt being proprietary, keep in mind there are easily dozens, if not hundreds, of open-source add-ons for Qt. Even if you exclude KDE, which is responsible for most of them, and dozens of add-ons released by Qt directly, you still have things like qwt, pyside, pyqt4, and many other independent, open-source add-ons for Qt. So one add-on being closed source is hardly a significant fraction.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
          That is legally impossible. Most new features need to be integrated into Qt proper, since they will involve modifications to the existing code. This is why pretty much all of Digia's work is part of the open-source Qt release.

          If you are really concerned about a single add-on for Qt being proprietary, keep in mind there are easily dozens, if not hundreds, of open-source add-ons for Qt. Even if you exclude KDE, which is responsible for most of them, and dozens of add-ons released by Qt directly, you still have things like qwt, pyside, pyqt4, and many other independent, open-source add-ons for Qt. So one add-on being closed source is hardly a significant fraction.
          exactly my point, what we need is the core Qt libraries and i believe in the worst case scenario KDE team can handle Qt good enough after all they are the biggest consumer of the libraries but i seriously doubt this will happen cuz digia only handle the commercial support of Qt and in the case that digia wanna go rougue im pretty sure intel and nokia will stay making digia's Qt worthless[like i said no one will pay support for a framework where there is 2 different API/ABI and most likely this bussiness will switch or return to the FOSS version since it has the bigger guns]

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by liam View Post
            N

            Maintenence isn't the issue (though I think it would be stretching the kde devs to continue supporting as many platforms as they do) it's the new development that has to happen that's the potential problem. According to the qt wiki on the new governance model, the assumptions had been that nearly all code was contributed by either the owners of QT or contractors. If that was the case then the community doesn't have a history of significant code contribution, let alone serious new development that qt has been known for.
            Historically most of KDE's work has gone into kdelibs, with the restructuring in KDE5 part of what KDE is doing is working more closely with Qt to push the stuff that is useful outside of KDE into Qt instead of keeping it for themselves. Historically it was more difficult for KDE to help out like this but with the new open governance model KDE is taking a more active role in Qt devleopment.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
              That is legally impossible. Most new features need to be integrated into Qt proper, since they will involve modifications to the existing code. This is why pretty much all of Digia's work is part of the open-source Qt release.

              If you are really concerned about a single add-on for Qt being proprietary, keep in mind there are easily dozens, if not hundreds, of open-source add-ons for Qt. Even if you exclude KDE, which is responsible for most of them, and dozens of add-ons released by Qt directly, you still have things like qwt, pyside, pyqt4, and many other independent, open-source add-ons for Qt. So one add-on being closed source is hardly a significant fraction.
              Well, that depends on the POV: for me, python extensions are of zero value, while proper charting in the toolkit would come useful often.

              Anyway, let's see how the story unfolds.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by curaga View Post
                Well, that depends on the POV: for me, python extensions are of zero value, while proper charting in the toolkit would come useful often.
                That is why we have calligra. As I said, the vast majority of development on Qt add-ons is happening in the KDE community. I was just pointing out a few additional projects that are not affiliated with KDE in any way.

                Comment

                Working...
                X