4 ms·

PySide: LGPL Python bindings for the Qt Framework

47 points by mace 17y ago

tuukkah 17y ago
Related work: "Although based on a different technology than the existing GPL-licensed PyQt bindings, PySide will initially be 100% API-compatible with them." Background: "Work on PySide was initiated within the Maemo division of Nokia once the lack of suitably licensed Qt Python bindings became apparent."
bd 17y ago
Cool, though there is no Windows or Mac support (so far).
- tuukkah 17y ago
  Now that Nokia owns Qt, it'll be interesting to see what stance they take towards Microsoft's and Apple's desktop platforms. Somehow I think proprietary desktops have relevance to Nokia only as platforms for rich internet applications which currently need some access to native APIs, while the main focus is naturally on keeping their mobile offerings number one (based on the number of units in use). Qt as a cross-platform native API is an edge in this against Microsoft's and Apple's mobile platforms. To help in this, they can continue to bring software from the Free desktops to the mobile world (Maemo, Qt, Python). They consider web developers important, which can be seen in their work to integrate WebKit, Javascript, CSS, SVG into Qt.
pavlov 17y ago
I feel a bit sorry for Riverbank, the company that makes the existing PyQt bindings, because their business model is being wiped out as Nokia replicates their efforts 1:1. Riverbank relied on dual licensing (GPL + commercial) to monetize their open source work, but this doesn't work anymore as Nokia has converted the entire Qt ecosystem to LGPL. But such is life for a toolmaker: when the platform provider decides that your product is good enough to be integrated, you're out of business. The best defense is probably to make tools that are not merely API plumbing, but have a user-facing component that is not easily replicated.
- tome 17y ago
  Could they just have sold to the platform provider? Maybe not in this case, but in general is a possible and good strategy?
  - mbreese 17y ago
    Since the original GPL and the new LGPL bindings use a different technique, I doubt he could have sold it to Nokia. Nokia likely had a different method in mind, or had some sort of technical reason for wanting to use the existing code. Also, I don't think that having your exit strategy be getting bought by the tool-providing company that your code depends on is a good one. They could just as easily use your work as a template for their own, and obsolete your product in the process. I think that it would be too risky.
  - pavlov 17y ago
    The PySide FAQ says: Nokia’s initial research into Python bindings for Qt involved speaking with Riverbank Computing, the makers of PyQt. We had several discussions with them to see if it was possible to use PyQt to achieve our goals. Unfortunately, a common agreement could not be found, so in the end we decided to proceed with PySide. It sounds like Nokia wanted to make a deal first. Maybe Riverbank underestimated Nokia's willingness to throw sheer manpower at working around them, or perhaps Riverbank thought that reimplementing the APIs through "cleanroom" reverse engineering would be more difficult than it turned out to be.
mrjbq7 17y ago
It is very disappointing that Nokia and Riverbank couldn't find a way to work together. Phil (at Riverbank) has done a tremendous job of supporting Qt on Python, when Trolltech wouldn't. He has always been responsive, and attentive to details.

47 points by mace 17y ago

Related work: "Although based on a different technology than the existing GPL-licensed PyQt bindings, PySide will initially be 100% API-compatible with them." Background: "Work on PySide was initiated within the Maemo division of Nokia once the lack of suitably licensed Qt Python bindings became apparent."

bd 17y ago

Cool, though there is no Windows or Mac support (so far).

tuukkah 17y ago
Now that Nokia owns Qt, it'll be interesting to see what stance they take towards Microsoft's and Apple's desktop platforms. Somehow I think proprietary desktops have relevance to Nokia only as platforms for rich internet applications which currently need some access to native APIs, while the main focus is naturally on keeping their mobile offerings number one (based on the number of units in use). Qt as a cross-platform native API is an edge in this against Microsoft's and Apple's mobile platforms. To help in this, they can continue to bring software from the Free desktops to the mobile world (Maemo, Qt, Python). They consider web developers important, which can be seen in their work to integrate WebKit, Javascript, CSS, SVG into Qt.

pavlov 17y ago

I feel a bit sorry for Riverbank, the company that makes the existing PyQt bindings, because their business model is being wiped out as Nokia replicates their efforts 1:1. Riverbank relied on dual licensing (GPL + commercial) to monetize their open source work, but this doesn't work anymore as Nokia has converted the entire Qt ecosystem to LGPL. But such is life for a toolmaker: when the platform provider decides that your product is good enough to be integrated, you're out of business. The best defense is probably to make tools that are not merely API plumbing, but have a user-facing component that is not easily replicated.

tome 17y ago
Could they just have sold to the platform provider? Maybe not in this case, but in general is a possible and good strategy?
- mbreese 17y ago
  Since the original GPL and the new LGPL bindings use a different technique, I doubt he could have sold it to Nokia. Nokia likely had a different method in mind, or had some sort of technical reason for wanting to use the existing code. Also, I don't think that having your exit strategy be getting bought by the tool-providing company that your code depends on is a good one. They could just as easily use your work as a template for their own, and obsolete your product in the process. I think that it would be too risky.
- pavlov 17y ago
  The PySide FAQ says: Nokia’s initial research into Python bindings for Qt involved speaking with Riverbank Computing, the makers of PyQt. We had several discussions with them to see if it was possible to use PyQt to achieve our goals. Unfortunately, a common agreement could not be found, so in the end we decided to proceed with PySide. It sounds like Nokia wanted to make a deal first. Maybe Riverbank underestimated Nokia's willingness to throw sheer manpower at working around them, or perhaps Riverbank thought that reimplementing the APIs through "cleanroom" reverse engineering would be more difficult than it turned out to be.

mrjbq7 17y ago

It is very disappointing that Nokia and Riverbank couldn't find a way to work together. Phil (at Riverbank) has done a tremendous job of supporting Qt on Python, when Trolltech wouldn't. He has always been responsive, and attentive to details.