On Thursday, 2015-06-25, 18:45:52, Florian Bruhin wrote:
> * Kevin Krammer <kevin.kram...@gmx.at> [2015-06-25 18:35:41 +0200]:
> > On Thursday, 2015-06-25, 15:56:22, Florian Bruhin wrote:

> > > I still have some hope - I think Qt will still apply at least security
> > > fixes for QtWebKit until Qt 6, which still should be a while away.
> > 
> > I would also be surprised if they would knowingly ship insecure code.
> 
> I wouldn't call it *knowingly* - but chances are slim that someone
> will take care of security issues until there's a bug report - and
> even then, I guess it depends on the ressources Qt is willing to
> allocate to QtWebKit (which seems to be dropping at a fast rate the
> past few months).

Hmm, I would think that there are people monitoring webkti related security 
lists, the new engine is webkit based as well.

Also there might be commercial entities currently using QtWebKit who would 
want to get such update either as part of existing service agreements with one 
of the companies providing such services or through new agreements 
specifically set up for this.

The open nature of Qt makes resource allocation basically driven by demand.
E.g. all the code contributed by KDE developers was created because KDE 
applications needed it.

Cheers,
Kevin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-- 
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk

Reply via email to