Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE Now Maintaining Their Own Set of Patches For Qt 5

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by ddriver View Post
    Why not contribute directly to the neglected fos version of qt?
    Because people on here believe that you can't maintain a toolkit if you don't have 200+ people working on it.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Alexmitter View Post

      It will take the KDE Community about 5 years from now to port the at least still frequently used projects.
      ... the transition from qt5 to qt6 will not be as demanding as it was from qt4 to qt5.
      So hopefully next year we will already be on fully functional qt6.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

        Because people on here believe that you can't maintain a toolkit if you don't have 200+ people working on it.
        Considering the less than ideal state of Qt which is developed by a team much larger than KDE, these people probably have a point.

        Comment


        • #34
          No, KDE must remain QT, otherwise it has no reason to exist. Mental saws are users who often prefer one toolkin to another ..., QT is open source.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Raka555 View Post
            Here is something worthwhile for the rust people to rewrite ...
            And them call it ...

            Rt

            Comment


            • #36
              All the discussions in this thread are nonsense, a waste of time and to spread hatred to Qt.
              First, Qt is GPL and LGPL licensed.
              Second, if you contribute Qt you allow them to make a dual license in GPL/LGPL and proprietary, yes, but your code will still be GPL. Also Qt is not a program, it's just a toolkit to make programs, it's not such a problem to allow a dual license when GTK for example can be included in proprietary programs in the same way as the proprietary version of Qt. Of course everything you contribute to GTK remains free software, but so does Qt because of its dual license.
              Third, in a year KDE will be transitioned to Qt6.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by discordian View Post
                So there are already halfway towards doing their own https://www.copperspice.com/, why not just move over?
                It would most probably be a hell of a lot of work to bring copperspice up to date, since it's a fork of Qt 4.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Raka555 View Post
                  Here is something worthwhile for the rust people to rewrite ...
                  Rust is not fit this kind of stuff, it's much worse than C++, it shines in the realm of little tools and random small libs.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Cmon guys. Any chance of a fork is dead now. KDE chose Qt6. Nothing will change.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I don't have much interest in kde, but for some purposes I use a browser (falkon) which is nominally within kde. And for that I need qtwebengine, so I'm pleased to see this development - in the future it might make it easier to keep that up to date. At the moment, a quick look suggests they are "only" at the 5.15.3 webengine fixes, for later fixes see https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtwebengine.git/log/?h=5.15

                      To be fair, gentoo and Arch were at a similar point to that when I last looked.

                      Getting into the webengine fixes (i.e. chromium fixes) is a bit of a pain, the submodule needs to be on the 87-based branch at the moment.

                      And perhaps this will mean that distros like fedora and debian start to pick up the recent CVE fixes for qtwebengine.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X