> Who is going to pay for the extra IP dedicated for this? Maybe we should put a > price tag on uses for port 443: if you want to use it, pay $10 per month to > the Qt Project Hosting Foundation and we'll enable your account to use it > (IPv6-only should be free or cheaper). > > Then you can take it up with the Finance department instead to explain why > that cost is necessary. Better, charge it to the IT department's cost centre.
Discussing 10 EUR (or finding someone - company or personal - in the community to help out with such a thing) is way, way and way simpler at times than discussing things radically against the IT department policies, especially if when it comes to security as their consideration. Not to mention 10 eur each month is high though... for hetzner it is 1 eur/month for the IP. > Really. Really. > I understand that convincing the IT departments of some companies to change > their policies is like banging the head against the wall. But we must try. I > really do not like your defeatism. I really dislike your forcement for /everybody/ and /each/ case. Like, I said, let the companies decide what make sense in their case. You cannot see every company internally, how they work and so forth after all. Worked for Nokia and also with Intel tightly together back then on the Maemo and MeeGo project, and also for other companies. Perhaps, your goal is achievable in Nokia, Intel and many companies, but it does not unfortunately work in certain cases. I am sorry for saying that, but that is how I see certain companies working internally. I have had many IT tickets opened years ago which are still being there. Nothing happened. Pushed many times, nothing happened. I would not even like to put more energy uselessly into such a thing, if there is a way simpler and approved way with much less stress. Best Regards, Laszlo Papp _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
