>I will rewrite my software with another tool again...
good luck with that
On 12/28/18 5:37 PM, anton wrote:
I was considering using Qt and
I even did a prototype of a mostly working tool half a year ago.
But looking at the strange development culture and quality attitude
I think I give it up.
I will rewrite my software with another tool again... too much surprises
in Qt.
Your story is only one of similar ones.
This is sad, because I really would like to use Qt and I like KDE as one
example.
Greetings
Anton
Am 14.12.18 um 14:07 schrieb Massimo Callegari:
Hi devs,
I hate to write these emails, but Jira and Gerrit don't really work for
me. (and at this point I suspect I definitely have BAD luck)
The question this time is: what's the deal with Qt3D ?
Since a year or so, submitting Qt3D issues to Jira or even contributing
on Gerrit is like writing to /dev/null. Not even a "please close" is
considered.
I take all the efforts are going on Qt3D Studio, but what about all the
rest ?
Please let me explain what I'm doing.
I run a quite popular open source project called Q Light Controller+
(https://www.qlcplus.org)
It's a software to control stage lighting and it's entirely based on Qt.
Over the years I adopted more and more Qt modules and (here's my bad
luck) I stumbled on every possible Qt bug.
At some point I wanted to find a solution to preview in 3D and in real
time the lighting simulation.
I followed the Qt3D 2.0 developments for years and when I felt it was
mature enough, I started to code the 3D preview.
Since I don't have the necessary OGL skills for what I needed, I was
willing to pay someone to do the job.
I contacted KDAB for an official quotation and they didn't even reply to
me. So I crowdfunded the feature among my users and paid someone else to
develop the 3D techniques.
The bright side is that with Qt3D as it is, we've been able to achieve
this (https://youtu.be/eI_NfA_vyA0) and this (https://youtu.be/yoQVzYR-NwM).
On the other hand, performance sucks and since Qt 5.11, a few
regressions started to kick in.
The blocking one for me is QTBUG-69721. I invested time and effort to
adopt the DAE format, cause it supports named+nested meshes, and it's
XML, so it can be tracked on GitHub.
Since 5.11, meshes can no longer be picked on macOS, so it means I
cannot release any version of my software there. (also cause of broken
video playback on core context QTBUG-51064)
So I evaluated glTF, being another nice open format...and found a disaster.
The current scene import plugin does not conform to the Khronos 1.0
reference samples. Even the "wine" example bundled in Qt3D doesn't work!
So basically Qt is bundling a nearly useless feature.
Plus, Blender 2.80 beta has started to roll, and it finally supports
native export to glTF....2.0....not supported by Qt3D.
So I spent a few days and got preliminary glTF 2.0 support. With PBR
materials it looks pretty awesome! (see screenshots in QTBUG-61258)
I submitted my code to Gerrit
(https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/247080/) and invited as many
reviewers as possible.
Almost 2 weeks passed and I got ZERO comments/reviews by any Qt
Company/KDAB developer.
I mean, don't you want it? Not even in Qt3D Studio?
This is very discouraging for developers like me who spend their time
trying to improve Qt.
If this attitude keeps going, I will end up not contributing at all in
the future, and I suppose I'm not alone on this.
So, once again, what's the deal with Qt3D?
Please explain, cause to me it looks in a quite abandoned state right
now. (management-wise speaking)
Thanks,
Massimo
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
