On Wednesday, 10 December 2025 03:26:57 Pacific Standard Time Volker Hilsheimer via Development wrote: > On a product/marketing/communications level, I think we would do ourselves a > disservice by getting lost in technicalities. The story we want to tell is > that we are making Qt available to Python/C#/Java/Swift/Rust developers. We > won’t reach those developers if we throw module and technology names at > them that they won’t understand if they know nothing about Qt.
Repository names do not have to map to the marketing name of the technology. For example, Qt Quick and QML live in the "qtdeclarative" repository, for historical reasons. However, in this case, it's the marketing name that is the problem: you're not giving access to 95% of Qt; you're only providing access to QML and Qt Quick. So I find that calling it a "Qt Bridge" is misleading, unless there are plans to expand to more than QML. In which case, I ask again that someone explain how this relates to PySide. This is just advice and feedback. We have no jurisdiction over the marketing. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Principal Engineer - Intel DCG - Platform & Sys. Eng.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
