Qt 6.1 Feature Freeze Now In Effect

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Qt 6.1 Feature Freeze Now In Effect

While Qt 6.0 wasn't even released a full two months ago, the Qt 6.1 feature freeze went into effect this morning in trying to get out this next update sooner...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Qt-6.1-Feature-Freeze

[Numeric]

Qt can’t be trusted.

Correction: Qt Company shouldn't be trusted. Qt itself is just another forkable toolkit (framework). Just like GTK.

To each their own.

[skeevy420]

They should have never done the LTS paid stuff until 6.x was KDE-ready. Basically, make sure the free one works with the free community and their software.

And unless one of y'all is Elon Musk, STFU about forking it. Qt isn't something that a small group of random people can fork and maintain for free.

[RahulSundaram]

. Qt isn't something that a small group of random people can fork and maintain for free.

This is obviously true and people shouldn't throw around the idea of forking casually but given large scale commercial users, if they were really motivated to do it, an alliance could be formed. I doubt they will be able to muster enough resources to have the current momentum but maintenance should be feasible. Given the increased investment into running a lot of the cross platform applications based on web tech, I doubt there is enough motivation anyway. Paying for a license is cheaper and that's what QT the company is banking on.

[r_a_trip]

And unless one of y'all is Elon Musk, STFU about forking it. Qt isn't something that a small group of random people can fork and maintain for free.

Forking QT in its entirety probably is few bridges too far, but KDE would be better off if they started working on a contingency plan. The Qt Company doesn't seem too financially stable and their priorities have shifted to staying afloat. I don't blame them for that, but the shift is a signal that the easy free ride is over and KDE is a far lower priority.

KDE needs a base that they can depend on and which is not under "foreign" control. What form such a beast should should take is anyone's guess, but just closing the eyes and hope for the best is not a very trustworthy strategy.

[skeevy420]

This is obviously true and people shouldn't throw around the idea of forking casually but given large scale commercial users, if they were really motivated to do it, an alliance could be formed. I doubt they will be able to muster enough resources to have the current momentum but maintenance should be feasible. Given the increased investment into running a lot of the cross platform applications based on web tech, I doubt there is enough motivation anyway. Paying for a license is cheaper and that's what QT the company is banking on.

I totally agree. It's not like we're talking about a single piece of software here.

What's kind of funny is that we don't really see all the fork the kernel comments when they do screwy changes.

[skeevy420]

Forking QT in its entirety probably is few bridges too far, but KDE would be better off if they started working on a contingency plan. The Qt Company doesn't seem too financially stable and their priorities have shifted to staying afloat. I don't blame them for that, but the shift is a signal that the easy free ride is over and KDE is a far lower priority.

KDE needs a base that they can depend on and which is not under "foreign" control. What form such a beast should should take is anyone's guess, but just closing the eyes and hope for the best is not a very trustworthy strategy.

I guess that would be porting from Qt to EFL or GTK??


Or I wonder if we could bother Musk into paying for a fork since Teslas use Qt and he has enough of an f-u spite mentality to do it because he can.

[Slartifartblast]

Qt, the toxic toolkit.

[r_a_trip]

I guess that would be porting from Qt to EFL or GTK??


Or I wonder if we could bother Musk into paying for a fork since Teslas use Qt and he has enough of an f-u spite mentality to do it because he can.

I don't know what the best strategy is here. KDE is a Qt product. Porting to another framework might result in something not quite KDE. It probably takes years, which would put KDE behind. There is no clear everybody wins answer here. It might sort itself out and Qt 6 develops quicker than expected and it is business as usual from there. It also might not. Gutting Qt to the minimal bits to support KDE alone isn't ideal either. It might be better maintainable, but breaks Qt compatibility.

If Mr. Musk is willing to buy the Qt Company and then put a few million yearly into development and maintenance, why not? It would take away the money concerns. If it will solve differences in direction remains to be seen...

[bug77]

Forking QT in its entirety probably is few bridges too far, but KDE would be better off if they started working on a contingency plan. The Qt Company doesn't seem too financially stable and their priorities have shifted to staying afloat. I don't blame them for that, but the shift is a signal that the easy free ride is over and KDE is a far lower priority.

KDE needs a base that they can depend on and which is not under "foreign" control. What form such a beast should should take is anyone's guess, but just closing the eyes and hope for the best is not a very trustworthy strategy.

Qt has changed owners before and KDE is still fine.