That's some brutal stuff. Comments interjected.
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 at 9:40 AM
> From: "Roland Hughes" <rol...@logikalsolutions.com>
> To: "Artem Sidyakin" <artem.sidya...@qt.io>
> Cc: "interest@qt-project.org" <interest@qt-p
On 09/23/2016 11:11 AM, Artem Sidyakin wrote:
Digia
From the 1st of May it’s The Qt Company now :)
Thank you for that information.
NOBODY will pay royalties, period
Participating in calls and meetings with customers, I see a different picture.
Having been in IT over 30 years now working
23.09.2016, 22:17, "Jason H" :
>
> Even the old Qt UI files were somewhat declarative, with signal/slot mappings
> included in the UI file.
This sounds like you are not sure what word "declarative" means. Of course, UI
file is 100% declarative, irrespectively from if
> > Actually, the entire industry is moving to declarative.
>
> Declarative with mandatory bits of imperative Javascript?
Well with blanket statement being admittedly blanket in nature and subject to
all the caveats therein, yes.
I realize that many of you are embedded engineers, and will
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 05:13:44PM +0200, Jason H wrote:
>
> > Not an isolated case. Client after client tells the same story. The
> > licensing
> > team at Digia must be paid on commission because _every_ use requires a
> > license when you first contact them.
>
> FWIW, My dealings with the
> Digia
From the 1st of May it’s The Qt Company now :)
> because of this attempt to squeeze licensing and royalties out of the general
> public
> I highly suspect the LGPL3 move was done to help squeeze
So, in your opinion it is totally fair to create “closed” products
(TiVoization) using
On 09/23/2016 10:13 AM, Jason H wrote:
What I don't like right now about Qt is the 3-legged arthritic dog
running in deep snow called QML. It was a bastardized concept when first
conceived and it hasn't gotten any better. Nokia started that concept
which explains why they are non-existent in
> Not an isolated case. Client after client tells the same story. The
> licensing team at Digia must be paid on commission because _every_ use
> requires a license when you first contact them.
FWIW, My dealings with the licensing people have been good.
> What I don't like right now about Qt
On 09/23/2016 06:18 AM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
23.09.2016, 13:50, "Roland Hughes" :
[snip]
What I don't like right now about Qt is the 3-legged arthritic dog
running in deep snow called QML. It was a bastardized concept when first
conceived and it hasn't gotten
> -Original Message-
> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+tuukka.turunen=qt.io@qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Roland Hughes
> Sent: perjantaina 23. syyskuuta 2016 13.50
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] What you don't like about Qt
&
Tried replying to this earlier, but didn't see the content come up so
will toss in my 0.0003 cents on this thread.
>>- C++ is difficult, Qt lacks quality bindings for mainstream languages
- moc (on build systems that don't automate this step)
- FUD around licensing
Well, Digia has itself to
11 matches
Mail list logo