Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 88

Thread: Qt 4.8 Draws In Platform Abstraction, New WebKit

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    ... it might as well just be easier to do a new KDEish desktop without Qt.
    Check this s... out. Haven't tested it yet and it's not complete, but I think it's promising. Oh, you wanted one without Qt? Err...umm...enlightenment?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    nope, the point of the licensing scheme is so that businesses or other entities that want to make proprietary changes to Qt for use in their software can, LGPL is for everyone else.

    edit: I'd link you the licensing page where it says this but it's been moved over to digia which is currently giving a 404
    Then why not simply use BSD/MIT/Apache/etc and call it a day?
    The kind of dual licensing that is being mentioned here, with different code for each, makes me a bit nervous, and I don't use any qt code-based products. Frankly, it seems a bit opencore-ish.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    Then why not simply use BSD/MIT/Apache/etc and call it a day?
    The kind of dual licensing that is being mentioned here, with different code for each, makes me a bit nervous, and I don't use any qt code-based products. Frankly, it seems a bit opencore-ish.
    Likely the same reason that they've got the contributor agreement. They want people to use the LGPL licensed one but they currently have a contractual obligation to provide a version under a proprietary license. Hopefully this will change with Qt 5.x series.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Considering KDE is a segfaulting piece of c... it might as well just be easier to do a new KDEish desktop without Qt.
    KDE is not gnome that is rewritten every time when it becomes too huge and bloated. KDE's working perfect here.

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    They cannot restrict the license, if they try it automatically gets release under an even more permissive BSD license.
    As far as I know it doesn't have to be bsd license, but it can be GPL as well.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    KDE is not gnome that is rewritten every time when it becomes too huge and bloated. KDE's working perfect here.
    So, they just rewrite when qt decides to change major versions? Does this occur less often than Gnome rewrites?
    From my experience KDE is less stable than Gnome (KDE3, strangely, was horrible for me -- I don't think it was ever stable enough to be usable with my hw; KDE4 has been better recently, but plasma is still pretty unstable).
    Dick measuring aside, it might be best for the kde community to fork qt for their own good, IF they are large enough, and skilled enough to handle it. KDE doesn't really need to care too much about other platforms, and if they started designing primarily for the linux desktop they might end up with something even more interesting (and less buggy, I would imagine). This is something Gnome has decided to do, and I think it for the best given developer resources.
    What are your thoughts?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,094

    Default

    I don't think there has ever been a full rewrite of KDE. Bits and pieces were rewritten for KDE SC 4, but not the whole thing.

    With Qt switching to an open governance model, and increased modularity in both KDE and Qt, I don't see any advantage to a fork. The things they need in Qt they should have a much easier time pushing there, and if they can't (either because it isn't accepted or because of licensing issues) they can always create their own implementation, subclass, or mini-fork of whatever bits they need while still keeping everything else (KDE actually already does this in a bunch of cases, but they are trying to push those into Qt for Qt 5.0 and KDE frameworks 5). So they can continue using whatever parts of Qt they like, hopefully fix whatever parts are causing problems, and use their own versions if neither of those two options pan out for whatever reason. So what is the advantage of a fork?

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    Dick measuring aside, it might be best for the kde community to fork qt for their own good, IF they are large enough, and skilled enough to handle it. KDE doesn't really need to care too much about other platforms, and if they started designing primarily for the linux desktop they might end up with something even more interesting (and less buggy, I would imagine).
    Obviously you've never heard of the KDE on windows http://windows.kde.org/ or KDE on Mac http://community.kde.org/Mac teams, or Plasma Active http://plasma-active.org/ . KDE isn't just going to go on the linux/*BSD desktop, KDE wants to go everywhere, and KDE going everywhere not only helps it's modularization but also brings in new developers to help make it better and more stable, and unlike Gnome, since KDE has Plasma they can actually pull this off with minimal development and maintenance cost with multiple dedicated UXes.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    That's all fine and dandy, but nobody in their right mind is ever going to run KDE on anything other then on a BSD or Linux system. The only people that really care about that sort of thing are KDE developers that run OS X as their main desktops and whatnot.

    It's nice, but it's not like it really is going to matter much to anybody except a tiny audience.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Qt is portable. If the KDE library's break this portability its harder to get application developer. As I see it, its not important that the desktop is portable but its very important that the libraries is.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •