Qt 6.1 Beta 2 Released, Qt-Project.org Called For Revival

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Qt 6.1 Beta 2 Released, Qt-Project.org Called For Revival

This week marked the arrival of Qt 6.1 Beta 2 for providing the latest bug fixes for this cross-platform toolkit ahead of the planned release next month...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Qt-6.1-Beta-2

[ed31337]

I'm still using Qt 5.15.2, which was 100% perfect as far as I could tell on X.org, but now that I'm using Wayfire/Wayland, I am seeing a few little bugs here and there that might induce me to migrate to Qt 6. Right click context menus sometimes pop up at the wrong x-coordinate, drag and drop files from Nemo to my Qt application doesn't seem to work (could be my code though, Qt Creator seems to sometimes accept a drag and dropped file ok), etc. Nothing too serious though.

[ayumu]

Neat, a site just to control QT's open source image and to encourage external contributors to work for free.

[TemplarGR]

Neat, a site just to control QT's open source image and to encourage external contributors to work for free.

This. Why contribute on someone else's project? Are you a slave?

[oleid]

So, the open source version is the same which gets also used for new commercial releases?
And if I contribute, I'll lose all rights? And internally crafted fixes to my and other people's contributions (as well as bug fixes for Qt.io code) get released one year later? Did I recall all this correctly?

[leo_sk]

So, the open source version is the same which gets also used for new commercial releases?
And if I contribute, I'll lose all rights? And internally crafted fixes to my and other people's contributions (as well as bug fixes for Qt.io code) get released one year later? Did I recall all this correctly?

No, the open source version is GPL lisenced, its code can not be bundled as closed source. The commercial version of qt, which is not open source is ahead of open source one

[leo_sk]

Neat, a site just to control QT's open source image and to encourage external contributors to work for free.

You mean like chromium, darwin etc? Atleast open source version of QT is GPL complaint, so no software that uses the open source code can be completely closed source

[oleid]

No, the open source version is GPL lisenced, its code can not be bundled as closed source. The commercial version of qt, which is not open source is ahead of open source one

You mean LGPL, right? So the OSS project is only for the code, which gets open sourced with about 1 year delay, correct? So that would mean they are not allowed to use the open source code in the commercial code? That seems unlikely, as you would have two incompatible code bases given some time.

[DanL]

Why contribute on someone else's project? Are you a slave?

You don't seem to understand this open source thing too well..

[leo_sk]

You mean LGPL, right? So the OSS project is only for the code, which gets open sourced with about 1 year delay, correct? So that would mean they are not allowed to use the open source code in the commercial code? That seems unlikely, as you would have two incompatible code bases given some time.

It does not mean that the qt code that has been released as open source can not be used in commercial branch. It means that any software that is closed source and shown to have used code from open source qt would be breaking the terms of GPL license. In other terms, if you want to make a closed source program with qt, you have to buy liscence for commercial branch of qt from qt company.