4 ms·

Which point of criticism is this meant to address? In a normal open source project they wouldn't have to rely on the company providing the source code in tarbal

by ptx 3y ago

Which point of criticism is this meant to address? In a normal open source project they wouldn't have to rely on the company providing the source code in tarball form as a special favor,

ducktective 3y ago
>Which point of criticism is this meant to address? That they don't release updates for Qt6 anymore (they did) Yeah, I'd have preferred a more streamlined pipeline like other FOSS projects but still, Qt is like, _the only_ no-nonsense cross-platform option that we got. In serious GUI libraries space, there is Windows, there is Apple, and...that's pretty much it. I mean unless Elon gonna chip in and pay for development of it, we can't expect competent people work on an alternative to these giants for free.
- formerly_proven 3y ago
  (This comment references Tesla using the LGPL version of Qt in their cars at no cost. Lots of automotive projects use Qt but generally the commercial variant.)
  - ducktective 3y ago
    >Tesla using the LGPL version of Qt in their cars at no cost lol really?! I didn't know! I just plugged in his name since he has become Tony-Stark-archetype for "tech enthusiast" crowd.
dotti 3y ago
That probably meant source tarballs of a Qt release before the actual release happened so that Debian could take it in before their freeze deadline. Release tarballs are and have been available on download.qt.io. And git repository is also open.
sho_hn 3y ago
> Which point of criticism is this meant to address? In a normal open source project they wouldn't have to rely on the company providing the source code in tarball form as a special favor, No, you misunderstood this one. A lot of major open source projects have processes where source tarballs are released to distro packagers a short while (e.g. a week or a couple of days) before the public release announcement and public tarball availability. This gets you last-minute testing, and makes the distro partners happy because they get to brag about same-day packages when the release goes live, which also makes the users happy when they read about the shiny new release and wonder if they can get it yet. KDE has been doing this for 20 years via it's packagers mailing list, and so do many others. If you don't it that way, dumb things happen like distros releasing RC tags as "we have the release now" so they can announce same-day availability, and occasionally bugs slip through. Been there, done that. You probably understood this as "normally you could just look at the git repo", but that's also true for Qt 6.
seba_dos1 3y ago
Debian includes unmodified tarballs in its archive for its source packages, so since they needed it before the freeze, they definitely would have to rely on that in similar scenarios.

by ptx 3y ago

Which point of criticism is this meant to address? In a normal open source project they wouldn't have to rely on the company providing the source code in tarball form as a special favor,

ducktective 3y ago

>Which point of criticism is this meant to address? That they don't release updates for Qt6 anymore (they did) Yeah, I'd have preferred a more streamlined pipeline like other FOSS projects but still, Qt is like, _the only_ no-nonsense cross-platform option that we got. In serious GUI libraries space, there is Windows, there is Apple, and...that's pretty much it. I mean unless Elon gonna chip in and pay for development of it, we can't expect competent people work on an alternative to these giants for free.

formerly_proven 3y ago
(This comment references Tesla using the LGPL version of Qt in their cars at no cost. Lots of automotive projects use Qt but generally the commercial variant.)
- ducktective 3y ago
  >Tesla using the LGPL version of Qt in their cars at no cost lol really?! I didn't know! I just plugged in his name since he has become Tony-Stark-archetype for "tech enthusiast" crowd.

dotti 3y ago

That probably meant source tarballs of a Qt release before the actual release happened so that Debian could take it in before their freeze deadline. Release tarballs are and have been available on download.qt.io. And git repository is also open.

sho_hn 3y ago

> Which point of criticism is this meant to address? In a normal open source project they wouldn't have to rely on the company providing the source code in tarball form as a special favor, No, you misunderstood this one. A lot of major open source projects have processes where source tarballs are released to distro packagers a short while (e.g. a week or a couple of days) before the public release announcement and public tarball availability. This gets you last-minute testing, and makes the distro partners happy because they get to brag about same-day packages when the release goes live, which also makes the users happy when they read about the shiny new release and wonder if they can get it yet. KDE has been doing this for 20 years via it's packagers mailing list, and so do many others. If you don't it that way, dumb things happen like distros releasing RC tags as "we have the release now" so they can announce same-day availability, and occasionally bugs slip through. Been there, done that. You probably understood this as "normally you could just look at the git repo", but that's also true for Qt 6.

seba_dos1 3y ago

Debian includes unmodified tarballs in its archive for its source packages, so since they needed it before the freeze, they definitely would have to rely on that in similar scenarios.