KDAB didn't actually explain anything. AFAICT, there's no statement.
Just a vague post explaining nothing.
So I'm not sure what the point of asking Qt about it is. You should be
asking KDAB what their issue is. If they see a problem, they should
state what that problem is.
On 08/11/17 12:54, Alexander Ivash wrote:
This is really confusing.
From one side,
What you **don't** say is, that you "genuinely wish to treat the Qt
Project as an Open Governance project and that external contributions
are welcomed and valued."
There must be a reason not to write this sentence.
Because it goes without saying.
Correct, it does go without saying.
.... but from the other:
The Open Governance model is the foundation of how we develop Qt. It offers
tremendous value to our users and customers. It’s also one of the big items
that differentiates Qt from all it’s competitors. And changing that would be
negative for everybody, including The Qt Company.
So, speaking for The Qt Company: No, there are definitely no plans to change
that.
So what does it mean in total? Qt stays Open Governance-driven, but no
'genuinely' ? Or genuinely but external contributions are not
welcomed? :)
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
