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.
The 95% of Qt's functionality shall be made available to QML via QML
modules usable via the bridges. See for example what we do with
QtLocation, QtMultimedia, QtGraphs etc.
I'm in favor of the "Qt Bridge for X" names.
best regards,
Ulf
PS: QtCore hasn't quite caught up, indeed. We only have Permissions,
Settings, StandardPaths and SystemInformation in the QtCore QML module.
That's a bit meager.
--
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
