On 9/7/11 6:16 PM, "ext BRM" <[email protected]> wrote: >----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Bjørn Erik Nilsen <[email protected]> >>> While this may be completely true for GUI applications, it's not true >>> for applications that doesn't have a GUI at all. The vision is great >>> when we talk about technologies of the same "level" (QWidgets vs >> QML) >>> and if this discussion was about QWidgets I would understand your >>> point. >>> >>> But QtCore goes way far QML can go and IMHO we should support these >>>use >> cases... >>> >> >> Yes, we will continue to support these use cases (if possible), it's >> just that our main focus is shifted towards QtQuick-based applications >> which means that is the use case we are going to optimize for. > >Out of curiosity, how much of the user-base of Qt would that be for? 40%? >60%? > >It's certainly not 100%, and as otherwise noted in one of the threads >over the last few days, Qt Commercial users would have a problem using >QtQuick given licensing issues. (Not unsolvable for them; but still an >issue.) >I do realize that Qt Commercial users are probably <10% of Qt users right >now, the biggest being KDE users. I'm just curious how this all falls out.
Licensing might be better with Qt 5 actually, as V8 is BSD licensed, so it doesn't have a forced LGPL dependency as with 4.x. Cheers, Lars > >Personally I haven't gotten into using QML yet - namely b/c it would be >too big an overhaul of my one GUI application to do so; and most of my >applications are closer to QtCore - being daemons via the QtService >Component. > >$0.02 > >Ben > >_______________________________________________ >Qt5-feedback mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
