> Widgets are "Done", meaning no new features. We will not add QAnchorLayout, > no > matter how much you ask. > > We can, however, publish the research and let you use it in your own > applications, at your own risk. No bug reports will be accepted, though.
That would be great of course :-) BTW, with the new open source/governance approach, what happens if some "external" programmers bring a good class in a domain which is 'done', as widgets' domain is. Is it rejected or accepted (as far as the stuff is good, of course). Philippe On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 10:24:39 +0200 Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: > Em Saturday, 4 de June de 2011, às 09:48:19, Philippe escreveu: > > In the same way there is a "QGraphicsAnchorLayout", I wish there could > > be also a "QAnchorLayout" for widgets. > > We have that researched. But it was never released. > > > After 4.6 was released, I was told this would happen in a future release, > > but I have seen no mention of it later. > > > > I have understood that widget stuff is not a priority anymore, but I > > believe that class would be important to add. That's maybe the only thing I > > am missing in the classical widget classes. > > You misunderstand. It's not that widgets aren't a priority. > > Widgets are "Done", meaning no new features. We will not add QAnchorLayout, > no > matter how much you ask. > > We can, however, publish the research and let you use it in your own > applications, at your own risk. No bug reports will be accepted, though. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org > Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks > PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint: > E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358 _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
