Not saying you should build Qt with it, I do see the point Thiago makes, but it looks like qbs is becoming a major point of even going Qt if we go by ppl's comments.
Feels like you could extend support and see if it's feasible to switch to it a few years later. On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 4:41 PM NIkolai Marchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > Thiago, Lars: can we please have another blog post asking for people to > voice their opinion on the matter? > it does seem like you are underestimting how much traction qbs has. > People in the comment section are saying they are porting their projects > to qbs left and right. > This is very far from "failed to gain traction" > More like: "finally gaining momentum" > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 4:35 PM Kari Oikarinen <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 31.10.2018 15:26, Christian Gagneraud wrote: >> <snip> >> > PS: completely off-topic, has qt.io (aka the Qt Company) ever heard of >> > https everywhere [1]? >> > The Qt mailing list archive is currently serving plain HTTP over HTTPS >> > port [2]. And is redirecting http to https... >> > >> > [1] https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere >> > [2] http://lists.qt-project.org/ >> >> It's a new problem that popped up recently and IT should be onto fixing >> it now. >> >> -- >> Kari >> _______________________________________________ >> Qbs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs >> >
_______________________________________________ Qbs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs
