It is also good to remember that if one person is saying it then ten others are thinking it. I, too, am not happy with the dependencies added for Qt 5, and I have not been happy about it for some time. I've bit my tongue about it because I don't consider my opinion on the matter all that important in light of comments like Thiago's. My response has been, "Oh, Windows sucks? I must suck too because I use it. I'm not even going to bother bringing it up since I suck so much for using Windows." Is this really what Qt wants their users to be thinking and doing?
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Bob Hood <bho...@comcast.net> wrote: > On 4/10/2013 2:52 PM, Justin Ferguson wrote: > > Support will always suck for that platform. > > Please don't make disturbing statements like that. Ifthat were actually > true, > then it hugely discounts Qt as an option in development pipelines, whether > or > not it provided commercial support. I would not go to my team and > champion Qt > on the project, knowing that "support will always suck for" Windows. We > use > Windows/Visual Studio as our primary development platform, and then > build/tweak on OS X (and probably Linux, before long). AFAIK, only one > person > on my team uses OS X as his primary development platform. > > My problem is that the introduction of Perl to the build process breaks the > out-of-the-box nature of Qt. All I required before was the compiler/IDE > environment that I would have already been installed anyway for me to be > able > to use Qt in the first place. Now, Perl is on my system just for one > aspect > of building Qt, and it is of no further use. Awkward design. > > Look, I understand it's OSS, and I also understand that Thiago (like many > others) is a volunteer, and it was not my intent to attack him or his > contributions in any way. I'm simply concerned by a growing tendency I am > seeing in the industry as a whole as OSS becomes employed to a greater and > greater degree commercially. I've seen some OSS projects have an > "it's-good-enough" attitude, which is fine when it stays within the OSS > ecosystem, but when it gets into commercial endeavors, it can be very > frustrating to depend on, or, in some cases, even fatal. > > I always had the impression that Qt's developers held themselves to > somewhat > higher standards for an OSS project. > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest >
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
