Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Kevin Kofler]

Kojo Tero wrote:
> The other side of the coin is crowding the developer page with
> information. A page about contributing might be a solution, or then a
> rethink of the developer page.

For the mailing lists, you make a very clear distinction between development 
WITH Qt and development OF Qt. So why not also make them separate pages on 
your web site?

Kevin Kofler

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Alexander Nassian]

I also see a growing trend at The Qt Company on trying to sell more commercial 
licenses by creating fear because of the opensource licenses. At any corner you 
hear „ohh, ohh that may not be legal to distribute, but just be sure buy a 
license“. This makes me kind of sad. I love Qt, I love commercial services and 
I love open source. Commercial support or additions to opensource projects 
should be sold by providing a benefit to the customer, not by creating fear.

Just my 2 cents,
Alexander Nassian

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Nilesh Kokane]

On Apr 19, 2016 6:49 PM, "Kojo Tero"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Point taken. The open source side does need to be more clearly visible.
>
> Currently the developer page is structured more toward the new user, with
the idea that more experienced users will visit again and find more
content, like the contribution guidelines.
>
> So the improvement idea can be split in two parts:
> - Provide a clearer path for potential contributors to get involved in Qt
> - Make it more clear that Qt is available as open source
>
> In practice the wiki does have a pretty good set of "how to contribute"
pages, but a new user will not stumble upon them by accident. Making links
to those from the developers page would probably help a lot. Also having
the contribution guide in the wiki is beneficial from my point, as then
anyone contributing can improve the guide.

+1

> The other side of the coin is crowding the developer page with
information. A page about contributing might be a solution, or then a
rethink of the developer page. The new brand style actually provides better
tools for cleaner information presentation. I'll talk with a web developer
about how to present the information and start trying things.
>
> The other point on making the open source side more visible needs more
thinking. It probably can be achieved partially on the developer page, but
it needs wordings in many places.

+1
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Sean Harmer]

On Tuesday 19 April 2016 13:19:34 Kojo Tero wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Point taken. The open source side does need to be more clearly visible.
> 
> Currently the developer page is structured more toward the new user, with
> the idea that more experienced users will visit again and find more
> content, like the contribution guidelines.
> 
> So the improvement idea can be split in two parts:
> - Provide a clearer path for potential contributors to get involved in Qt
> - Make it more clear that Qt is available as open source
> 
> In practice the wiki does have a pretty good set of "how to contribute"
> pages, but a new user will not stumble upon them by accident. Making links
> to those from the developers page would probably help a lot. Also having
> the contribution guide in the wiki is beneficial from my point, as then
> anyone contributing can improve the guide.
> 
> The other side of the coin is crowding the developer page with information.
> A page about contributing might be a solution, or then a rethink of the
> developer page. The new brand style actually provides better tools for
> cleaner information presentation. I'll talk with a web developer about how
> to present the information and start trying things.
> 
> The other point on making the open source side more visible needs more
> thinking. It probably can be achieved partially on the developer page, but
> it needs wordings in many places.

Thanks Tero, much appreciated.

Sean

> 
> Tero
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Development
> [mailto:development-bounces+tero.kojo=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On
> Behalf Of Sean Harmer Sent: tiistaina 19. huhtikuuta 2016 15.42
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tuesday 19 April 2016 12:50:20 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > I feel that with the unification, there is less and less visibility of
> > the Qt open source project:
> > The qt.io home page contains no information that Qt is open source and
> > contains contributions from the community; The "Developers" section,
> > to which http://qt-project.org redirects, mostly contains information
> > for developers using Qt, (and more than half seems to be marketing
> > targeted for people not yet using Qt) and only a very small paragraph
> > near the end seems somehow targeted to contributors; Any links or
> > aggregation to planetqt seems gone. Planet Qt is supposed to be an
> > aggregation of the blogs of Qt contributors.
> > 
> > It was much better in 2015 where the developers page contained
> > information for contributors
> > http://web.archive.org/web/20150723065217/http://www.qt.io/developers/
> > 
> > I think there should be a "Contributors" section from qt.io  where qt-
> > project.org would redirect. And which would have links useful for
> > contributors, including links and aggregation of planet qt.
> > 
> > I acknowledge that The Qt Company is by far the biggest contributor to Qt.
> > And that because of the CLA, they have no obligation whatsoever.
> > But I just feel it's not fair to hide the open source nature of Qt and
> > the open source contribution completely from qt.io. When the
> > unification was announced, it was said that the open source qt-project
> > would continue to be represented, but i just feel it's no longer the case
> > with the new website.
> I agree. It's important to make it clear that Qt can still be used under
> FOSS licenses for free, and that Qt contains a large proportion of code
> contributed by individuals and companies outside of The Qt Company:
> 
> http://www.macieira.org/~thiago/qt-stats/current/qt-all.employer.relative.pn
> g
> 
> By not making it easy for people to see that it is possible for them to
> contribute Qt and making it easy for them to get on board with the process
> we are harming the project. Having a guide to making your first
> contribution would be great, and perhaps having a support person available
> to help mentor new contributors would be nice.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Sean
> --
> Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK KDAB (UK) Ltd,
> a KDAB Group company Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
> Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604
> KDAB - Qt Experts
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

-- 
Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK
KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company
Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604
KDAB - Qt Experts
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Kojo Tero]

Hi,

Point taken. The open source side does need to be more clearly visible.

Currently the developer page is structured more toward the new user, with the 
idea that more experienced users will visit again and find more content, like 
the contribution guidelines.

So the improvement idea can be split in two parts:
- Provide a clearer path for potential contributors to get involved in Qt
- Make it more clear that Qt is available as open source

In practice the wiki does have a pretty good set of "how to contribute" pages, 
but a new user will not stumble upon them by accident. Making links to those 
from the developers page would probably help a lot. Also having the 
contribution guide in the wiki is beneficial from my point, as then anyone 
contributing can improve the guide.

The other side of the coin is crowding the developer page with information. A 
page about contributing might be a solution, or then a rethink of the developer 
page. The new brand style actually provides better tools for cleaner 
information presentation. I'll talk with a web developer about how to present 
the information and start trying things.

The other point on making the open source side more visible needs more 
thinking. It probably can be achieved partially on the developer page, but it 
needs wordings in many places.

Tero

-Original Message-
From: Development 
[mailto:development-bounces+tero.kojo=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On 
Behalf Of Sean Harmer
Sent: tiistaina 19. huhtikuuta 2016 15.42
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

Hi,

On Tuesday 19 April 2016 12:50:20 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> I feel that with the unification, there is less and less visibility of 
> the Qt open source project:
> The qt.io home page contains no information that Qt is open source and 
> contains contributions from the community; The "Developers" section, 
> to which http://qt-project.org redirects, mostly contains information 
> for developers using Qt, (and more than half seems to be marketing 
> targeted for people not yet using Qt) and only a very small paragraph 
> near the end seems somehow targeted to contributors; Any links or 
> aggregation to planetqt seems gone. Planet Qt is supposed to be an 
> aggregation of the blogs of Qt contributors.
> 
> It was much better in 2015 where the developers page contained 
> information for contributors 
> http://web.archive.org/web/20150723065217/http://www.qt.io/developers/
> 
> I think there should be a "Contributors" section from qt.io  where qt- 
> project.org would redirect. And which would have links useful for 
> contributors, including links and aggregation of planet qt.
> 
> I acknowledge that The Qt Company is by far the biggest contributor to Qt.
> And that because of the CLA, they have no obligation whatsoever.
> But I just feel it's not fair to hide the open source nature of Qt and 
> the open source contribution completely from qt.io. When the 
> unification was announced, it was said that the open source qt-project 
> would continue to be represented, but i just feel it's no longer the case 
> with the new website.

I agree. It's important to make it clear that Qt can still be used under FOSS 
licenses for free, and that Qt contains a large proportion of code contributed 
by individuals and companies outside of The Qt Company:

http://www.macieira.org/~thiago/qt-stats/current/qt-all.employer.relative.png

By not making it easy for people to see that it is possible for them to 
contribute Qt and making it easy for them to get on board with the process we 
are harming the project. Having a guide to making your first contribution would 
be great, and perhaps having a support person available to help mentor new 
contributors would be nice.

Kind regards,

Sean
--
Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK KDAB (UK) Ltd, a 
KDAB Group company Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604
KDAB - Qt Experts
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Sean Harmer]

Hi,

On Tuesday 19 April 2016 12:50:20 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> I feel that with the unification, there is less and less visibility of the
> Qt open source project:
> The qt.io home page contains no information that Qt is open source and
> contains contributions from the community;
> The "Developers" section, to which http://qt-project.org redirects, mostly
> contains information for developers using Qt, (and more than half seems to
> be marketing targeted for people not yet using Qt) and only a very small
> paragraph near the end seems somehow targeted to contributors;
> Any links or aggregation to planetqt seems gone. Planet Qt is supposed to be
> an aggregation of the blogs of Qt contributors.
> 
> It was much better in 2015 where the developers page contained information
> for contributors
> http://web.archive.org/web/20150723065217/http://www.qt.io/developers/
> 
> I think there should be a "Contributors" section from qt.io  where qt-
> project.org would redirect. And which would have links useful for
> contributors, including links and aggregation of planet qt.
> 
> I acknowledge that The Qt Company is by far the biggest contributor to Qt.
> And that because of the CLA, they have no obligation whatsoever.
> But I just feel it's not fair to hide the open source nature of Qt and the
> open source contribution completely from qt.io. When the unification was
> announced, it was said that the open source qt-project would continue to be
> represented, but i just feel it's no longer the case with the new website.

I agree. It's important to make it clear that Qt can still be used under FOSS 
licenses for free, and that Qt contains a large proportion of code contributed 
by individuals and companies outside of The Qt Company:

http://www.macieira.org/~thiago/qt-stats/current/qt-all.employer.relative.png

By not making it easy for people to see that it is possible for them to 
contribute Qt and making it easy for them to get on board with the process we 
are harming the project. Having a guide to making your first contribution would 
be great, and perhaps having a support person available to help mentor new 
contributors would be nice.

Kind regards,

Sean
-- 
Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK
KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company
Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604
KDAB - Qt Experts
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

[Development] Qt-Project misrepresented on qt.io

[Olivier Goffart]

Hi,

I feel that with the unification, there is less and less visibility of the Qt 
open source project:
The qt.io home page contains no information that Qt is open source and 
contains contributions from the community;
The "Developers" section, to which http://qt-project.org redirects, mostly 
contains information for developers using Qt, (and more than half seems to be 
marketing targeted for people not yet using Qt) and only a very small 
paragraph near the end seems somehow targeted to contributors;
Any links or aggregation to planetqt seems gone. Planet Qt is supposed to be 
an aggregation of the blogs of Qt contributors.

It was much better in 2015 where the developers page contained information for 
contributors
http://web.archive.org/web/20150723065217/http://www.qt.io/developers/

I think there should be a "Contributors" section from qt.io  where qt-
project.org would redirect. And which would have links useful for 
contributors, including links and aggregation of planet qt.

I acknowledge that The Qt Company is by far the biggest contributor to Qt. And 
that because of the CLA, they have no obligation whatsoever.
But I just feel it's not fair to hide the open source nature of Qt and the 
open source contribution completely from qt.io. When the unification was 
announced, it was said that the open source qt-project would continue to be 
represented, but i just feel it's no longer the case with the new website.

-- 
Olivier

Woboq - Qt services and support - https://woboq.com - https://code.woboq.org

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development