On Wednesday, 31 October 2018 03:02:04 PDT Bernhard Lindner wrote: > Maybe I worked for the wrong companies all the time. But whenever we wanted > to have proof that some tool or library actually meets our requirements, it > never was sufficient to *ask* for proof. We needed to test it by *ourselfs* > in a feasibility project.
For qbs, most of the proof was "you still have work to do". That means *I* didn't have to do anything, but the proponents of it had to get it to mature. > And normally *none* of the candidates completely met all of our requirements > so we chose the tool with the least flaws, the best potential and (most > important!) with the most dedicated maintenance/support crew. And of course > some trust was part of the decision. Of course, not denying that. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
