Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand you are not a fan.
Right in time for the cutest pun of the year :-)
Missed opportunity: s/cutest/coolest
A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
31–40 of 125 posts
Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#32Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll bite. Define "better" here.
Not a fan of electron at all. But I think it points out the direction for the future of gui. There's a whole generation of new languages (rust, go, dart, D, ...) that wants to get into the gui-space and finding QT and GTK problematic. QT is known for "using every C++ feature", making it less than ideal for bindings. GTK is not very cross platform I think, and is criticized for beeing gnome-centric. Both toolkits are…
I'd like the pain-point parties (Apple, Microsoft) to just ship open-source linkable libraries of somekind in their app stores.
If OSX, Windows, and the mobile stores carried a common framework developers could target it would become a defacto UI standard since you could finally develop a cross-platform app that used 'native widgets' (at least a library that might already be installed) for every given platform, and which could have an OS prompt that asks to install it from a trusted source if they don't happen to have it.
Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#34Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#35> In case The Qt Company would ever attempt to close down Open Source Qt, the foundation is entitled to publish Qt under the BSD license. This notable legal guarantee strengthens Qt. It creates trust among developers, contributors and customers. Woah, I had no idea about this. I wonder what kind of new changes would take place if Qt were BSD licensed, such as languages like D embedding it as a solution for UIs as par…
Qt is massive, I doubt small communities would rush to integrate it and make it their job to maintain it all...
I doubt anyone in OSS communities is seriously deterred from using Qt because of the LGPL. It’s just a very big and very complex project that requires a lot of manpower to “tame”.
Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#36Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#37Trolltech were pretty awesome, in their days. The “poison-pill BSD” setup is pretty smart; if i remember correctly , it was introduced when they started wobbling a bit from the commercial perspective, in order to keep the community calm while they went looking for buyers (which they eventually found in Nokia). It would be sad if the switch had to be triggered at a time when QT is supposed to be “back in the game” after years of uncertainty.
Dear Qt owners, don’t mess around. If you can’t make money from Qt, it’s not because of the license. Build more bridges, and more developers will come to you.
Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#38> In case The Qt Company would ever attempt to close down Open Source Qt, the foundation is entitled to publish Qt under the BSD license. This notable legal guarantee strengthens Qt. It creates trust among developers, contributors and customers. Woah, I had no idea about this. I wonder what kind of new changes would take place if Qt were BSD licensed, such as languages like D embedding it as a solution for UIs as par…
Qt is massive , I doubt small communities would rush to integrate it and make it their job to maintain it all... I doubt anyone in OSS communities is seriously deterred from using Qt because of the LGPL. It’s just a very big and very complex project that requires a lot of manpower to “tame”.
I guess it depends on how much of Qt you need. If you just need the basics you can import mainly what you need[0]. In the case of D though one of it's focuses is to work well with C++ directly. I'm not talking about maintaining it all, I'm talking about embedding it directly into the standard library of a programming language.
I guess you do make a fair point in regards to the LGPL though.
[0]: Here's an example of someone building only a minimal amount of Qt: https://github.com/dirtycold/qt-minimal-build
Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#39Re: A Better Qt Because of Open Source and KDE
#40It would be good for KDE to get stronger backing, but I've heard RedHat avoids backing KDE and focuses on Gnome, due to aversion¹ to contributor agreements², is that correct in that case? 1. https://opensource.com/article/19/2/cla-problems 2. https://www.qt.io/legal-contribution-agreement-qt
I recommend the KDE neon distro to every Linux-curious person I meet. It's the latest and greatest KDE on top of an Ubuntu base, and it's by far the best desktop distro I have tried in my ~20 years of using Linux on the desktop.
I use KDE in Debian testing for a long time already. Easily the best DE around. Though I wish Debian would get faster updates. Even though testing is supposed to be rolling (besides freezes), something seriously stalls new Plasma uploads there.