Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE KWin Introducing Item-Based Scenes For Improved Wayland Support

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

  • Nth_man
    replied
    That "Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay" is false, as we can see. That doesn't stop people from telling falsehoods to others.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by Nth_man View Post
    > They have not released any official statement

    Nobody has released any official statement about the "Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay" and other things that aren't true but written by some people. That doesn't stop people from telling falsehoods to others.
    That not true. They did release a official statement to the KDE board.



    But last week, the company suddenly informed both the KDE e.V. board and the KDE Free QT Foundation that the economic outlook caused by the Corona virus puts more pressure on them to increase short-term revenue. As a result, they are thinking about restricting ALL Qt releases to paid license holders for the first 12 months. They are aware that this would mean the end of contributions via Open Governance in practice. Obviously, it cannot be in the middle- and long-term health of The Qt Company to separate itself from the very strong Qt + KDE communities. We hope The Qt Company will reconsider. However, this threat to the Open Source community needs to be anticipated, so that the Qt and KDE communities can prepare themselves. The Qt Company says that they are willing to reconsider the approach only if we offer them concessions in other areas. I am reminded, however, of the situation half a year ago. We had discussed an approach for contract updates, which they suddenly threw away by restricting LTS releases of Qt instead.
    Yes those on the KDE e.V. board and the KDE Free QT Foundation are required to inform KDE developer of this statement. There was also a email to those with commercial license about the possible change.

    "As a result, they are thinking about restricting ALL Qt releases to paid license holders for the first 12 months." << The statement wording what that is equal to as I said before "Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay." Yes that is end of the Open Governance model.

    They did not do a official public statement. But the did a lot of official private statements two to a parties that is legally required to release the contents to the public in some form. There has been no official private statement saying the idea has been dropped to commercial license holders yet so they have left it up in mid air. As well the fact it has leaked public and legally had to be Qt Company should do a public statement if the idea has been dropped or at least inform there commerical license holders and the kde board that is has been properly dropped.

    Nth_man what you are attempt to call a falsehood unfortunately is not. There could be a lot of foolish things Qt Company board could have been thinking when they sent out the statement they did to the KDE board and commercial users and don't want to public admit to.


    Leave a comment:


  • Nth_man
    replied
    > They have not released any official statement

    Nobody has released any official statement about the "Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay" and other things that aren't true but written by some people. That doesn't stop people from telling falsehoods to others.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by Nth_man View Post
    Imagine that I hadn't replied to what was written to me. It still would be stated that "The latest version of Qt under what the Qt Company proposed would only be for those who have paid for 12 months", "Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay", "its you", etc.
    The key word was proposed not done. So my statement is correct that is what the Qt Company proposed and currently has backed way from following though with. They have not released any official statement that they have completely given up on the proposal. Just they have not done it yet. The reality is the Qt Company could be waiting for the uproar to die down to attempt the proposed change again.

    Nth_man for long term planning you cannot look at what a company is just doing now particularly when they have proposed something horrible wrong and have not given official statement they have absolutely given up on the idea.

    PS there are official Qt company statements with the proposal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nth_man
    replied
    Imagine that I hadn't replied to what was written to me. It still would be stated that "The latest version of Qt under what the Qt Company proposed would only be for those who have paid for 12 months", "Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay", "its you", etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by Nth_man View Post

    > Qt5PatchCollection does not contain all the patches Qt Company has applied. [...]

    I didn't say otherwise.

    > The latest version of Qt under what the Qt Company proposed would only be for those who have paid for 12 months.

    Again, the latest version of Qt receives all the patches, without that 12 months delay that you say. And the past branches of Qt will get security fixes from the Qt Company, without that 12 months delay that you say.

    You said "This is very different to Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay", maybe you have heard it from what some other people say, and it's false.
    I should have been more correct what I wrote there was why people got so upset with the Qt proposed change and was out for Qt Company blood. That is a very different thing to the Redhat changing Centos to Centos Streams.

    The Qt latest version and past branches the fact security fixed will not be delayed now is due to the uproar that Qt Company basically got told that move was totally not acceptable. Those who were upset with the first Qt Company proposal was very correct to be upset with it.

    There is a difference between what Qt Company said they were going to-do before the uproar and what they have done after I will agree on that. But if you are asking why people were well and truly upset with the proposed Qt change you need to look at what was first proposed not what they have done now. Do note most of that uproar has basically stopped now that Qt Company changed their plan.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nth_man
    replied
    Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

    Qt5PatchCollection does not contain all the patches Qt Company has applied.
    https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-c...tml?print=cGh4

    Yes Nth_man would have paid to have read. The latest version of Qt under what the Qt Company proposed would only be for those who have paid for 12 months. This means a know security fault fix that the Qt Company knows about could be delayed for 12 months this well and truly exceed the recommend under 90 days.

    The change that caused the uproar was to be applied to all past and current branches. Really Nth_man its not me who not informed in this case its you.
    > Qt5PatchCollection does not contain all the patches Qt Company has applied. [...]

    I didn't say otherwise.

    > The latest version of Qt under what the Qt Company proposed would only be for those who have paid for 12 months.

    Again, the latest version of Qt receives all the patches, without that 12 months delay that you say. And the past branches of Qt will get security fixes from the Qt Company, without that 12 months delay that you say.

    You said "This is very different to Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay", maybe you have heard it from what some other people say, and it's false.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by Nth_man View Post
    As usual, oiaohm, there will be someone who will "inform" you that way. But past branches of Qt will get security fixes from the Qt Company and can get other fixes from e.g. Qt5PatchCollection. The latest version of Qt gets all the fixes.
    Qt5PatchCollection does not contain all the patches Qt Company has applied.
    https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-c...tml?print=cGh4

    Yes Nth_man would have paid to have read. The latest version of Qt under what the Qt Company proposed would only be for those who have paid for 12 months. This means a know security fault fix that the Qt Company knows about could be delayed for 12 months this well and truly exceed the recommend under 90 days.

    The change that caused the uproar was to be applied to all past and current branches. Really Nth_man its not me who not informed in this case its you.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nth_man
    replied
    Originally posted by oiaohm View Post

    This is very different to Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay.
    As usual, oiaohm, there will be someone who will "inform" you that way. But past branches of Qt will get security fixes from the Qt Company and can get other fixes from e.g. Qt5PatchCollection. The latest version of Qt gets all the fixes.

    Leave a comment:


  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by JackLilhammers View Post
    I was very direct and explicit. Being generic while implying very specific subjects is usually your modus operandi

    That said I don't think it's troll narrative at all. Red Hat pulled exactly the same sh*tty move that Qt pulled last year.
    The only difference is that you cheer Red Hat and can't stand Qt.
    With CentOS Stream now "tracking ahead" of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, where exactly does that leave Fedora, Red Hat's community Linux distro, and long-time RHEL test release?


    You need to read what Redhat did to CentOS users. Centos users are still getting all the security updates now ahead of the RHEL users with the change to Centos Streams they also get the beta tester for those who are using RHEL and are paying Redhat.

    The change redhat does is no more free lunch. There was a horrible problem where CentOS was more stable than RHEL that is not good for Redhat profitablity. Why more stable is that RHEL users would get a update if it had a bug then CentOS users would not get it. CentOS changing to CentOS stream basically flips stability order to what it really should have been. If you freeloading you should be getting the beta tester grade product if you are paying you should be getting the nice validated stable product.


    This is very different to Qt where you no longer get the security updates or new features if you don't pay. Qt move is way more sh*tty. Redhat move did put the freeloaders noses out of joint but it was not cutting them off from features and security patches.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X