[Users] claws qt

[wwp]

Hello Salvatore,


On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:26:04 +0200 Salvatore De Paolis <iwkse at claws-mail.org> wrote:

> Hi Brian,
> 
> > 
> > Provided that Qt support exists for GNOME then I have no concerns at
> > all, I won't claim to understand enough to grasp the difference between
> > the two toolkits.
> >   
> 
> I don't think GNOME is going to provide "support" for QT as they don't even
> give backward compatibility with GTK (IMHO they do not mind much about
> app developers, they just break things and let app developers waste time
> fixing it and that's a spiral)
> 
> By what I've heard, this doesn't happen with QT

I have a long experience with Qt (at work, since first version), and
can ensure you that their frequent jumps forward require constant
adaptability efforts, sometimes losing hair and don't mandatory bring
stability. They're often going too fast, don't look enough backward to
customers who cannot follow (and give up w/ some Unices).

Best example is what happened to Qt since the beginning, moving from
one company to another, from one design to another, tracker to tracker,
customers being a lil' bit put to background.

Best example is their Qt 5.6 LTS is a total failure. Greedily created
at a stage where it was not possible to make a LTS from such version.

Best example is some feature regression or give up they keep introducing
(i.e. Qt assistant, their desktop help app, not making use of chromium
- WTF!?).

Best example is their e-nor-mous sources tree, embedding an incredible
amount of third-party libraries and tools. For people who are concerned
about licensing, take care.

Best example is their embedded chromium sources tree, a nightmare to
get built AND running on different ports (it's not a 100% portable
thing at all).

I spend months per year at work because of Qt new versions and
incredible dependencies, one of the best killer thing this past year
was QtWebEngine (the chromium thing). And spent days reporting to my
hierarchy that their support don't move on this or that case, and that
some bugs haven't got a single fix for months or years.

A part from this, their internal modules and API is now quite brilliant
and the amount of features is simply more than necessary. From a
free/open-source perspective, I presume that you don't face so much
problems w/ Qt or Digia, since you probably won't need to follow Qt LTS
or cover many ports. You can even keep working w/ Qt4 if you want.


Regards,

-- 
wwp
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.claws-mail.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170530/692d8aa8/attachment.sig>