On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Matti Airas <matti.p.ai...@nokia.com> wrote: > > Furthermore, in addition to the wiki that is > already hosted by Qt, PySide could have the project mailing lists and the > bug tracker hosted by Qt.
My subjective judgement, but Qt hosting service suxx, and here is why: 1. Bugtracker Jira suxx. It doesn't support OpenID and OAuth, has an ugly theme and is too overloaded for PySide (or for me, whatever). 2. Design PySide pages has an attractive design and leave a good consistent feeling of the project in general. I can't say the same for Qt pages and its green-ogre-in-the-cloud theme. It is consistent, but no good. 3. Mailing list I am quite happy to have a Google Group mirror, and I am not sure it will be possible to sync it with a new list anymore. Considering that Qt uses the same mailman, there is no gain. 4. Repository Gitorious suxx. Just because there is GitHub with pull requests, pages and dozen of other nifty features. So, my opinion that even if PySide will be more exposed to Qt guys, it will likely be lost for Python community. It would probably be harder for me to start with PySide if it was hosted as one of numerous projects on a strange 3rd party site with no indication of life support. To me, exposing it to GitHub and Python community is more practical and usable. > When setting up the PySide project, we didn't anticipate moving back under > the Qt umbrella. Hence, the PySide project has not traditionally required > any contributor agreement. However, all Qt software, including the add-ons, > are licensed under the same terms, and therefore, if PySide is to become a > Qt Add-on, the contributors need to execute the Qt Contribution Agreement. I guess it makes this part - "We welcome any contribution without requiring a transfer of copyright." - no longer valid. A pity. An evil world is where you need to sign a paper to do something good. > The agreement primarily facilitates Nokia's compliance with its commitments > under the agreement with the KDE Free Qt Foundation, and enables commercial > Qt users to participate in the Qt Project. Most of the Qt code is currently > licensed under the LGPL v2.1, so there would not be drastic changes for the > PySide open source licensing. > > [2]http://qt-project.org/legal.html I don't understand what stops commercial Qt users from using PySide? IIUC after the agreement is signed, you give up all your authorship rights and Nokia or Microsoft or Oracle can do whatever they want with the license. I doubt they will change the license to MIT of public domain. I doubt they won't want constrain open source users more with patents and trademarks. So, it doesn't look very positive at all from this point of view. > I'd be very interested in hearing your opinions and comments regarding this > move! Well, if you didn't ask - I wouldn't answer. I've got a feeling that PySide is going to die, because Nokia can not afford to support/sponsor it anymore. So far it was a very pleasant experience, and if Qt umbrella is required for PySide project to continue - I guess I don't have any other choice than to support that move. Anyway, PySide is awesome! =) -- anatoly t. _______________________________________________ PySide mailing list PySide@lists.pyside.org http://lists.pyside.org/listinfo/pyside
