> > OK, but it is important that there are some fulltime developers. > > Why? Why are 2 full-time developers better than 20 part-time ones? > > I'd love to have full-time developers working on this, but I'll take what > I > can get. Besides, if you look at any feature over a reasonably long period > of > time (6 months or more), there isn't a single one that has a full-time > developer. All developers multiplex between features. > > Did you mean full-time equivalents? 20 developers devoting 10% of their > time is equivalent to 2 FTEs (in theory, of course).
Fulltime or not, something should happen, but ATM nothing happens. > > > > Maybe you'll volunteer to maintain the widget classes and bring it > > > back up from Done to Maintained? > > > > Have to think about it. > > > > My main concern is to make Qt again more attractive for > > desktop development. Most Qt developers came to Qt because > > of desktop support, but since several releases nearly nothing > > happens. A new Qt release isn't interesting any more > > for desktop developers. > > And it's mine too. Except my strategy isn't to continue to add features to > the > widget classes, but to make QML on desktop a first-class feature. > > And you make it sound like desktop developers are *only* interested about > widgets. Improvements in performance in QObject aren't interesting? The > new > improved file engine? How about new networking features? QtSql also had a > number of bugfixes... Not to mention, of course, QtWebKit 2.2 for the > hybrid > application development. > Sure non-GUI improvements are welcome, but having no progress on desktop GUI elements for years (4.2? until 5.2?) decreases my interest in Qt. Peter -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
