I consider a fully functional web engine component a very important piece of Qt. Easily embedding a website into a desktop application is extremely useful. Example applications are scrapers and website analysis tools. But there are a LOT more applications. Also more common ones.
If the choice is dropping the web engine component or dropping old compilers I wouldn't need to think a second about the decision. -- Kind Regards Bernhard Lindner > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: development-bounces+private=bernhard-lindner...@qt-project.org > [mailto:development-bounces+private=bernhard-lindner.de@qt- > project.org] Im Auftrag von André Somers > Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Februar 2015 08:43 > An: development@qt-project.org > Betreff: Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5 > > Knoll Lars schreef op 5-2-2015 om 16:28: > > But we don’t have much of a choice, if we want to deliver an up to > > date web engine. > Perhaps it is time to ask the question then: do we want to do that? Do we > really need to? > > It seems to me, that it isn't really possible to do. Not in a way that doesn't > require huge effort in support or pissing off everybody not on one of the > large main stream platforms. And the question might be: why should Qt > deliver an up-to-date web engine exactly? Do we really think that people are > going to use Qt to build advanced browsers? Sure, some might (KDE comes > to mind...), but you are right in your observation that the technology is > moving too fast and is developed between giants like Google, Apple and > Microsoft who could not care less about other uses or other platforms than > their own. > > All the while Qt is spending effort to catch up, deprecating compilers and > platforms because they can't take the latest Javascript engine to it, users > are > hapily using browers like Firefox and Chrome. > > Perhaps it is time to conclude that Qt just can't compete in this race if it > doesn't want to be crushed between the giants playing this field. > Perhaps it is just time to settle for indeed a simpler goal: don't try to > provide > a fully integrated full-fledged web engine, but instead settle once again for > a > simpler alternative that we _can_ support and that can be used for things like > showing embedded help or showing simple sites, and perhaps an API to > wrap and embed the native web view provided by the platform but with > limited integration. > > André > > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
