4 ms·
> I admit, I do not understand GTK/QT development model at all. It's very easy to understand. QT is a commercial and de-facto proprietary product and the deve
by sprash 3y ago
> I admit, I do not understand GTK/QT development model at all.
It's very easy to understand.
QT is a commercial and de-facto proprietary product and the development model is: do what the paying customer wants.
GTK has no customers and after it was taken over by the GNOME crowd the development model is to deliberately sabotage the FOSS ecosystem. Small long tail projects can not afford to follow the relentless stream of backwards incompatible changes produced by upstream and die off. Even big projects like GIMP struggle with this. The result is a broken ecosystem which serves certain market participants (e.g. that offer desktop operating systems) very well.
- JellyBeanThief 3y agoOn what basis are we claiming malicious intent by GNOME?
- TingPing 3y agoGNOME has developed it for decades. They broke API twice. Fewer times than Qt.
- sprash 3y agoThis is of course a lie. They declare widely used APIs as "internal interface" and break backwards compatibility on a regular basis even on sub minor version updates.
- llothar 3y agoI think you are talking about the styling API during the 3.10 - 3.16 years. Yes they did but the styling was never an official API. If you can't find the documentation in Devhelp, then it's nothing you should use. For people who thought they are smart its of course a fuckery. The most painfull came from breaking the drawing code: Gtk2 moved to Pango/Cairo, Gtk4 moved to GPU Textures. Gtk5 will now break ageing view models. And i hope Gtk6 will break the single threading of the whole Gui.