Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More Open-Source Participants Are Backing A Possible Fork Of Qt

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

  • More Open-Source Participants Are Backing A Possible Fork Of Qt

    Phoronix: More Open-Source Participants Are Backing A Possible Fork Of Qt

    This week's bombshell that future Qt releases might be restricted to paying customers for a period of twelve months has many open-source users and developers rightfully upset. Qt so far only provided a brief, generic statement but several individuals and projects are already expressing interest in a Qt fork should it come to it...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ssible-Qt-Fork

  • #2
    It's happening folks.... Qt will be forked.

    Comment


    • #3
      I personally hope it's forked. While it may miss out in some regards such as the browser components... I think it will benefit in other areas. Hopefully Qutebrowser and Falkon can figure something out if it's forked.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hopefully Qt Company will come to their senses and release LTS updates again as FOSS as well.

        Comment


        • #5
          > bombshell that future Qt releases might

          A "might" is a bombshell?

          Talking about sensationalism...

          Comment


          • #6
            And about something that was already debunked (https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-and-open-source).

            But that way, people lose their time discussing, while ads are served.

            Comment


            • #7
              So the Qt Company is pulling an Oracle...
              I suggest we come up with a nickname for them that includes Oracle reference, so they'd get ashamed and disgusted by themselves, and they change their mind.
              Maybe "The Qracle Company"?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Baguy View Post
                While it may miss out in some regards such as the browser components... I think it will benefit in other areas. Hopefully Qutebrowser and Falkon can figure something out if it's forked.
                The obvious choice would be to wrap QtWebEngine around a CEF core. I've always been deeply puzzled why Qt and KDE never wrote a Phonon-like wrapper for web engines and instead chose to do full forks for each new release. QtWebKit was not based on Apple's LTS (=Safari) branch and KHTML was not transformed into a wrapper, as such applications first had to do a full port from KHTML to QtWebKit and then a full port from QtWebKit to QtWebEngine.

                KDE media players never had that problem. They've used Phonon when Phonon's default back-end was still Xine and today they still use Phonon and users can decide on VLC, GStreamer, and MPV back-ends – whatever works best.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Nth_man View Post
                  And about something that was already debunked (https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-and-open-source).
                  "The Qt Company is proud to be committed to its customers, open source, and the Qt governance model." – I don't see how that would not mean delayed releases, esp. the LTS announcement was before the company could point to Corona as a scapegoat.

                  Some Qt fork may still be required, even it it's just as a hub for LTS distributions to share their bugfix patches over the course of the LTS distributions' lifetime.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If they really fork Qt, they should take the opportunity and throw out all bloat that nobody uses anyway.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X