+2 (if it does matter) Sent from Mailspring (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/6fa2ac51-f627-413f-8df1-fe1a8f21c...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F&recipient=aW50ZXJlc3RAcXQtcHJvamVjdC5vcmc%3D), the best free email app for work On Feb 27 2019, at 11:23 pm, Nelson, Michael <mnel...@sutron.com> wrote: > +1 > > Thank you Jason for being so vocal and expressing the concerns of other > invested users so well. > Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Interest <interest-boun...@qt-project.org> On Behalf Of Jason H > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 1:35 PM > To: Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turu...@qt.io> > Cc: interestqt-project. org <interest@qt-project.org> > Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter > > Ok, thanks for clarifying that. > It's not just me though, there are *many* people using Qt that have +1d me > and stated that they agree with me. Your customer survey reported 20% using > Mobile. I'm just very vocal about it. I've done many Mobile apps in Qt, each > with their own constellation of features that Qt does not cover. However as > someone with extensive linux experience, learning Android is it's own thing. > Activities and BroadcastReceivers, all in Java. The best way to manage that > is with JNI, which is it's own beast... Once you get that working, then comes > the iOS version, which is completely separate concepts and technologies. > Again, we're not looking to every possible API to be supported, just the > common ones that we all use, that are an essential part of the mobile > experience. The 80/20 proposition. > My expectation is as follows: That a developer new to Qt, can create an app > in QML on one platform and then have it "just work" by adding the other iOS > or Android kit. This is mostly realized as long as you're just talking about > putting things on the screen. But as soon as you want to do things like Push > Notifications (or even Local Notifications) you're into a world of pain. The > thing is, there is a huge amount of overlap. We just want the overlapping > parts covered. It's not an unreasonable ask for a cross platform UI. > You say you're "investing in and improving" Mobile. I just don't see it. I've > been actively using Qt on mobile since 5.4. I've gone over the release notes > from each release and they are minor. iOS got some accessibility stuff, > Android got Services. There have been efforts to keep things working, but > nothing really new has been added. > 5.2 > - iOS/Android platforms added > In terms of big picture: > 5.3 > -iOS platform plugin: > -- Support for input methods added. > -- Support for word completion and spell checking added. > -- Support for QClipboard added. > -- "Hide keyboard" gesture added. > - WinRt/8 > - Android: Bluetooth > - Positioning: added iOS Android. > 5.4 > - iOS > -- Accessibility support added. This enables Qt applications to be read by > VoiceOver. > -- iOS port now uses fat builds with both 32-bit and 64-bit support. > -- Improved support for iPhone6/6+. > -- QtQuick Controls now uses native text selection and popup menus. > -- Default theme fonts now uses Dynamic Type, which is based on user system > settings. > 5.5 - Nothing* > 5.6 > - NFC > -- Android > 5.7 > - Android > -- Android Services > 5.8 - Nothing* > 5.9 - Nothing* > 5.10 - Nothing* > 5.11 - Nothing* > 5.12 - Nothing* > > *Nothing does not mean nothing at all. The iOS and android modules are > clearly being maintained, and in a lot of cases iOS and Android platforms is > being added to existing features. (Like adding android support to Qt3D(5.5), > Bluetooth LE (5.5), NFC(5.6), etc.) > We're very happy that Qt is supporting these platforms, but the fear is that > unless Qt also adds modules for Mobile APIs and delivers what developers > expect to already exist on the platform, people will choose other toolkits > like Flutter, ReactNative, Xamarian, and that undermines the mobile > investment. I *want* Qt to be a top-tier cross-platform solution on mobile. > It does some things excellently - better than anywhere else. I like not > having to learn AVFoundation to record or playback audio and video, and then > have to learn the Android way. Qt has delivered on this exceedingly well. I > just want the same for the other things that Mobile Developers (and Users) > expect. Some things are so easy in Qt. But to make a full-fledged Mobile app, > Qt falls short and you're in a painful world of platform-sepecifics very > quickly, which limits the adoption of Qt. > Unless Qt commits to Mobile APIs, I'm just going to switch to Flutter for any > new apps, and only maintain the Qt ones. I'd rather bite that bullet once > rather than having to maintain separate code bases for each platform. Thanks > to this discussion, I've gone from biggest champion of Qt to, well, not an > advocate on Mobile. I had always held onto hope that these things would get > done "eventually", but I see now that's not the intent. Maybe this is done to > protect V-Play, but not having any Qt mobile users won't help them either. > Your every response has indicated this will not happen, just that mobile will > follow the other platforms. I don't understand why Qt won't commit to adding > the missing Mobile APIs. > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 at 12:03 PM > > From: "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turu...@qt.io> > > To: "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> > > Cc: "Bernhard B" <schluc...@gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" > > <interest@qt-project.org> > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter > > > > > > Hi, > > No, that is not correct understanding. Mobile is well maintained and > > developed further - just like the desktop and embedded platforms. > > We are constantly investing to the mobile and improving it with each > > release. For all the new features we always aim to get it running > > cross-platform, including mobile, whenever possible. So the functionality > > of mobile grows constantly, just like desktop and embedded. > > I do understand that you would like to have more of the device related > > items (volume control, brightness, ...) captured to a Qt API. But lack of > > this should not be seen as equal to lack of investment to mobile. What I > > wrote about it being relative easy to implement could be seen positively as > > well - at least I did not mean it in any way negative or insulting. > > Yours, > > Tuukka > > On 27/02/2019, 10.19, "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> wrote: > > So am I correct interpreting that Qt on mobile is "finished", and we're on > > our own? (Aside from maintenance) Your statement "often quite > > straightforward to capture in a cross-platform API." seems like a "let them > > eat cake" moment. I really think you are missing the point that these > > "straightforward" are anything but. Who knows Objective C and Java? Not > > many. Not to mention there are enough pain points in moving to another > > platform already. I believe the promise of cross platform Qt is at least to > > handle the code. > > What would it take to get Qt to commit to supporting device APIs? > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 11:34 PM > > > From: "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turu...@qt.io> > > > To: "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> > > > Cc: "Bernhard B" <schluc...@gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" > > > <interest@qt-project.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > Like you said, different users have slightly different needs, but there > > > are also many things common. Our focus recently has been to make sure > > > that old and new Qt features work nicely on mobile and in making sure new > > > mobile platforms are supported swiftly. A lot of effort was put to WinRT > > > / UWP to be supported in addition to iOS and Android. It is true that we > > > have not been actively extending the support for device APIs, even though > > > these are often quite straightforward to capture in a cross-platform API. > > > Yours, > > > Tuukka > > > From: Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> > > > Date: Monday, 25 February 2019 at 11.06 > > > To: Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turu...@qt.io> > > > Cc: Bernhard B <schluc...@gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" > > > <interest@qt-project.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter > > > > > > Tukka, > > > I don't think that there is a single Mobile user that finds your reply > > > adequate. > > > It sounds like you're dragging Mobile users along. We need a specific > > > mobile effort to add those mobile specific APIs the platform should have. > > > Without these APIs, my organization will not be able to justify continued > > > usage of Qt. I have to continually defend our selection of Qt. I've never > > > spoken to someone who was happy to have to use Qt. Xamarin, Flutter, and > > > ReactNative are what other developers want to use. I cannot expect to > > > continue to win this fight as Qt falls behind. > > > > > > I'm not the only one. I'm just the Squeakiest wheel. I can't really > > > justify another $1000/yr (1. that's just Indie, not Enerprise, 2. No > > > transparent pricing) after spending $3000 on Qt. > > > I'm begging you to add mobile APIs for: > > > - Device Hardware Control > > > -- Device Button Integration (volume, etc) > > > -- Display Brightness > > > -- Volume Control > > > -- Screen Control (Full Screen/ Nav Buttons, Wake Lock) > > > - Notifications (Push & Local, Desktop?) (Probably the dingle biggest > > > pain point) > > > - iOS NFC (starts at iPhone 7, iOS 10) > > > > > > These all might seem "not that hard", until you consider I have to do it > > > for 3 platforms: OSX, iOS, Android, each with their own tech stack. > > > (ObjC, JNI, Java) This is a huge pain point, considering that is the > > > fundamental problem that Qt claims solve. Except it doesn't... on Mobile. > > > It's not like I'm asking for bleeding edge APIs. Qt started supporting > > > iOS & Android 12th Dec 2013 with Qt 5.2. In the 5 years since, none of > > > the above have made it in and those are pretty basic features. Since that > > > time there were some early iOS accessibilty additions and Android service > > > capabilty. That's it. > > > I'm not asking for every possible mobile API to be supported, just a > > > 80/20. Other developers have their own needs, and I'm in favor of us > > > together coming up with that list, and having Qt commit to the top > > > item(s) each release. That's what I mean when I say I want a transparent > > > roadmap for mobile. > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 at 3:20 AM > > > From: "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turu...@qt.io> > > > To: "Bernhard B" <schluc...@gmail.com>, "interestqt-project. org" > > > <interest@qt-project.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter > > > Hi, > > > > > > I focused mainly in the tooling and cross-platform features in the > > > roadmap blog post. There are other items done as well – more than what > > > reasonably fits into a post. Mobile is an area where we are making > > > constant development, just like we do on desktop and embedded. > > > Currently the biggest new investment goes towards tooling and 3D – both > > > of which have some benefits for mobile as well. This of course eats some > > > development capacity away from other things, but it does not mean nothing > > > else would be done. > > > Many of our desktop and embedded users also address mobile – in addition > > > to those who address mobile only (or start with mobile). That is the > > > beauty of the cross-platform, with a growing number of users deploying to > > > mobile. > > > Yours, > > > Tuukka > > > From: Interest <interest-boun...@qt-project.org> on behalf of Bernhard B > > > <schluc...@gmail.com> > > > Date: Friday, 22 February 2019 at 14.28 > > > To: "interestqt-project. org" <interest@qt-project.org> > > > Subject: Re: [Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter > > > > > > Many thanks to Tuukka for the Qt Roadmap 2019 blog post > > > (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__blog.qt.io_blog_2019_02_22_qt-2Droadmap-2D2019_&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=cuOx16jORxiK5MX1A8nW4DjA7XVjmr66bnNYV7cI-pY&e=) > > > - very much appreciated! > > > As the mobile part was not explicitly mentioned, I assume that it won't > > > be a focusing area for 2019 then? :/ > > > Jean-Michaël Celerier > > > <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com<mailto:jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>> > > > schrieb am Fr., 22. Feb. 2019, 12:09: > > > > They even included, scripts to build the app. I'm not sure you have to > > > > go quite that far to be compliant, but awesome nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > You explicitely have to: > > > LGPLv3 4. e): Provide Installation Information, but only if you would > > > otherwise be required to provide such information under section 6 of the > > > GNU GPL, and only to the extent that such information is necessary to > > > install and execute a modified version of the Combined Work produced by > > > recombining or relinking the Application with a modified version of the > > > Linked Version. (If you use option 4d0, the Installation Information must > > > accompany the Minimal Corresponding Source and Corresponding Application > > > Code. If you use option 4d1, you must provide the Installation > > > Information in the manner specified by section 6 of the GNU GPL for > > > conveying Corresponding Source.) > > > And the corresponding GPL part (section 6, emphasis mine) : > > > The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all the > > > source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run > > > the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control > > > those activities. However, it does not include the work's System > > > Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free programs > > > which are used unmodified in performing those activities but which are > > > not part of the work. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 11:55 AM René Hansen > > > <ren...@gmail.com<mailto:ren...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Feb 2019, 13:47 Jean-Michaël Celerier, > > > <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com<mailto:jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>> > > > wrote: > > > Cisco did it with an app that uses gstreamer (which is under LGPL) : > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__itunes.apple.com_ua_app_cisco-2Djabber_id467192391-3Fmt-3D8&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=jK-sUDRpXmYx4I3_7Sszx6_jtj82INPjf1dcmyPb_mU&e=. > > > They send it on request, with the proprietary part in a static lib (see > > > at the end here : > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_GStreamer_gst-2Dplugins-2Dgood_blob_master_README.static-2Dlinking&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=mdK0jMt8dAi2AgnWNH143zYqOT6CiDwH5RAH2LFIyKA&e= > > > ) > > > > > > That is really cool. They even included, scripts to build the app. I'm > > > not sure you have to go quite that far to be compliant, but awesome > > > nevertheless. Maybe someone can clarify this further. I.e. Are you > > > responsible for providing a, or instructions for creating a, working > > > build environment, in order to be LGPL compliant. > > > > > > Best, > > > Jean-Michaël > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 6:07 PM Sylvain Pointeau > > > <sylvain.point...@gmail.com<mailto:sylvain.point...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > Do you have one example of someone who put a LGPL app in the app store > > > and provided the binary object files? > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 3:58 PM Julius Bullinger > > > <julius.bullin...@gmail.com<mailto:julius.bullin...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On 21.02.2019 15:44, Christian Gagneraud wrote: > > > > Qt is free (on mobile), free as in liberty, as long as your > > > > application is free, as in liberty. > > > > That's basic (L)GPL rules. > > > > > > > > Now there's the business rules: > > > > If you want your (mobile) app to be non-free (as in proprietary), then > > > > you'll have to pay the Qt company for that. Disregarding the fact that > > > > you want to make money or not. > > > > > > > > > Please do not spread this misinformation! As long as you adhere to the > > > terms of LGPL, you can create non-free, proprietary and closed apps with > > > Qt (or any other LGPL library for that matter). You only need to make > > > sure that the user can replace all LGPL parts with their own builds. > > > > > > The fact that the mobile OS's and app stores make it exceptionally hard > > > to do that is not an issue with the license terms. If you find a way > > > that enables the user to replace LGPL parts (for example by dynamic > > > linking or by making all object files and linking instructions available > > > on request), that's perfectly valid and legal. > > > > > > _That_ is a basic LGPL rule. > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tldrlegal.com_license_gnu-2Dlesser-2Dgeneral-2Dpublic-2Dlicense-2Dv2.1-2D-28lgpl-2D2.1-29&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=wJ2XxCZ09pvosp0UfNTCftmtdbfQpC9_oD_G0aj6aiI&e= > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tldrlegal.com_license_gnu-2Dlesser-2Dgeneral-2Dpublic-2Dlicense-2Dv3-2D-28lgpl-2D3-29&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=lMNRyimcDoSRLXSGZcv4yc44mEQ-V_HtR-24TIay5Wg&e= > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org> > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.qt-2Dproject.org_listinfo_interest&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=i5aaZmT7-cT9tdypu01W_Y43KnG1T2UhmmJyJl2fsBo&e= > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org> > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.qt-2Dproject.org_listinfo_interest&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=i5aaZmT7-cT9tdypu01W_Y43KnG1T2UhmmJyJl2fsBo&e= > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org> > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.qt-2Dproject.org_listinfo_interest&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=i5aaZmT7-cT9tdypu01W_Y43KnG1T2UhmmJyJl2fsBo&e= > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org> > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.qt-2Dproject.org_listinfo_interest&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=i5aaZmT7-cT9tdypu01W_Y43KnG1T2UhmmJyJl2fsBo&e= > > > _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.qt-2Dproject.org_listinfo_interest&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=i5aaZmT7-cT9tdypu01W_Y43KnG1T2UhmmJyJl2fsBo&e= > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.qt-2Dproject.org_listinfo_interest&d=DwIGaQ&c=9mghv0deYPYDGP-W745IEdQLV1kHpn4XJRvR6xMRXtA&r=81ZrscQ2yIyG6ANaI07JBq6GmZkaYdjZEl0tfKL-7tQ&m=gGBPBAvYL4BWl0AGYXbGj872UZbNcjjhnHlSIj_w434&s=i5aaZmT7-cT9tdypu01W_Y43KnG1T2UhmmJyJl2fsBo&e= > Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If > you are not the intended recipient, please notify us by email by replying to > the sender and delete this message. The sender disclaims that the content of > this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any > agreement; provided that the foregoing does not invalidate the binding effect > of any digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is > included in any attachment. > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest >
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
