5 ms·
Qt 6.7 Released
- rubymamis 3y agoCongrats on the release! I'm stoked to use variable fonts. Keep up the great work!
- Kelteseth 3y agoQt slowly replaces all LGPL code with GPL/Commercial code. For example, they will remove Qt3D in a future release[0] and the replacement is QtQuick3d that is GPL/Commercial. Most of new modules are GPL/Commercial only: - QtGraphs (rewrite of the old QtGraphs that was also GPL/Commercial only) - QtQuick3d - QtWebAssembly - QtProtobuf - QtHttpServer - Quick Timeline - Qt Lottie [0] https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2024-March/045127.html https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2024-Marc...
- wiz21c 3y agoI read this as a good news: more pressure towards free software !
- rubymamis 3y agoI don't know what to think of it. On the one hand, they all seem niche enough and the upside is that Qt will be able to sustain its work. On the other hand, I'm not sure if I want this to continue to accelerate till we can't develop regular GUI apps without GPL/commercial.
- tristan957 3y agoWhat is the problem with GPL/commercial? Everyone wins, especially users.
- rubymamis 3y agoPeople that are just starting out (bootstrappers), very small startups, or just people that can’t afford paying Qt’s license, but want/need to keep their code closed source this is a major block. It means you can’t use Qt without capital if you want your app to be close sourced. It creates sort of a chicken and egg problem for these people. They me be willing to pay for Qt’s license in the future, yet currently can’t afford to. Thus, they might abandon or not even start their Qt’s project.
- tristan957 3y agoAs long as you do not distribute your code to users, you can abide by the GPL. That means you can write your MVP before having to give The Qt Company a dime. The Qt Company also has small business pricing: https://www.qt.io/pricing/qt-for-small-business https://www.qt.io/pricing/qt-for-small-business.
- _mlbt 3y ago$499 a year per seat is a bit steep for Indie developers until they’re pulling solid revenue. I prefer other pricing models where it is free until you hit enough revenue to be able to easily afford it.
- rubymamis 3y agoYes, that would be much better. Tho, they should keep it a fixed price and not percentage. Just make sure the people using your framework can actually use it before they become a success.
- rubymamis 3y agoYeah but if you’re a sole bootstrapper with no other wage job, you likely can’t pay for the license and therefore can’t distribute to users (in order to first, gain money). This is what I mean in chicken and egg. You basically can’t start your career with Qt if you are in that situation and rely on commercial license.
- pjmlp 3y agoIt is only fair. Everyone gets to profit from Qt, to the extent they are willing to give money to upstream, while being paid themselves. Anyone that feels entitled to be paid, and not give anything upstream is free to look for alternatives, and hope that after a decade they are still relevant.