Can anyone comment on what the uptake of QML is like? Or are most still sticking with the traditional C++/Widgets approach? Are there any major limitations to using pure QML?
Qt 5.6.0 released
91–100 of 112 posts
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#92I really like Qt and think its an incredible framework overall. Even if you don't use the Qt libraries, QtCreator is one of the best C++ IDEs out there imo (though qmake really sucks and they've been dragging their feet on a proper replacement for years) The real show stopper for me with Qt is its licensing though. LGPL is a no-go on closed mobile platforms and its commercial license at $350/month is completely unrea…
Why not just put your proprietary stuff in a closed-source library and distribute the rest of the source in accordance with the LGPL? What's so horrible about that? Even iOS allows dynamic linking nowadays.
The problem isn't dynamic linking, its the requirement that the end user must be able to re-link a modified version of the LGPL code. So for example, the user should be able to replace the Qt libraries your application links to. On closed platforms like iOS and Android (on Google Play) this isn't really possible. How would your user access your application, modify it and re-sign it?
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a real shame the Python + Qt aren't more developed as a solution for creating cross platform mobile apps. At the moment there are several community efforts but most of them are half baked and have little adoption :(
The popular mobile platforms have never been very friendly to Python. In each case there was some conscious decision to favor specific languages very heavily rather than making it feasible to use different languages. It is hard to see how say PSF could fix this single-handedly.
JVM languages such as Clojure, Scala and Kotlin are friendly to both mobile and javascript platforms.
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just put your proprietary stuff in a closed-source library and distribute the rest of the source in accordance with the LGPL? What's so horrible about that? Even iOS allows dynamic linking nowadays.
The problem isn't dynamic linking, its the requirement that the end user must be able to re-link a modified version of the LGPL code. So for example, the user should be able to replace the Qt libraries your application links to. On closed platforms like iOS and Android (on Google Play) this isn't really possible. How would your user access your application, modify it and re-sign it?
Previous discussion on HN of the mail app Sparrow and their approach in complying with LGPL on iOS:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4302517
May be helpful to you.
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem isn't dynamic linking, its the requirement that the end user must be able to re-link a modified version of the LGPL code. So for example, the user should be able to replace the Qt libraries your application links to. On closed platforms like iOS and Android (on Google Play) this isn't really possible. How would your user access your application, modify it and re-sign it?
Previous discussion on HN of the mail app Sparrow and their approach in complying with LGPL on iOS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4302517 May be helpful to you.
Its not helpful, they aren't complying with the relinking clause. I don't think there's any way to use LGPL with closed source on mobile app stores.
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#96Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a new project, do you recommend PyQt or PySide?
Stick with PyQt, PySide seems dead.
PySide development was stalled, and its future was uncertain.
However, PySide is being developed again for Qt5: https://github.com/PySide/pyside2
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#98Qt is one of the nicest frameworks I've worked with. I write code that I expect to run (and look roughly the same) on all 3 major plats (win, linux, osx) and Qt does this a lot better than the alternatives. But what I really appreciate about Qt is the entire system was designed from the ground up by grownups who understand how to deploy software and have it last for over a decade. most of the frameworks today feel li…
It's amazing to me that they maintain binary compatibility across minor version bumps. Anything linked against Qt 5.0 (released 2012) will work with Qt 5.6 without even recompiling.
I also like that you can cast QObjects across dynamic library boundaries.
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Previous discussion on HN of the mail app Sparrow and their approach in complying with LGPL on iOS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4302517 May be helpful to you.
Its not helpful, they aren't complying with the relinking clause. I don't think there's any way to use LGPL with closed source on mobile app stores.
I'm assuming you didn't read it. I will give you benefit of the doubt since the Sparrow page was pulled after Google acquired them.
Sparrow made available on a website the necessary binaries for the user to relink if they so chose thus complying with the terms of LGPL.
Re: Qt 5.6.0 released
#100It was all good until this bit: " In addition, Pepper plugins (PPAPI), such as Flash, are now supported. " Ugh. :(
Someone downvoted that? Guess they like Qt adding vulnerabilities. :(