You are missing that the baseline is free access to _the source code_ _and_ a well-defined, provably working, reasonably fast way to get _your_ changes in, and influence the direction the whole thing goes with _your_ ideas.
Points two and three are _quite_ different from what we had at Trolltech and "early" Nokia times. Packaging of binaries on top of sources is "nice to have". "Really nice to have" actually, and a real differentiator when it comes to lowering the barrier of entrance, but by no means _essential_ in the process. Distributions will build from source, even most commercial customers re-build from source in a configuration _they_ need, instead of using the ones coming pre-compiled with (any of) the SDK(s). The Qt Project infrastructure is still being set up. I personally expect it to be able to build "stock" SDK packages at some point of time, and at the same time I expect Digia to continue building and supporting slightly different SDK packages as well. The SDK framework is intentionally modular to serve different combinations of individual components to adapt to different use cases. Andre' _______________________________________________ While true... that the binaries are not essential, the mkspec files are not... And digia apparently does not consider deriving from previously existing opensource mkspec files, open source... Ie VS 2008/2010 64 bit mkspec files which exist for digia customers, but are NOT in the opensource world Scott _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
