Dear Volker, I have always found Qt project fascinating from a technological perspective. I enjoy using it and I will surely continue to do so. Multiple times when I discovered that some things can be made faster, better or more robust I felt the need to give the community something back.
Unfortunately the process of contributing code to the project feels only a little bit better than eating glass. This probably seems silly at best for someone how does it daily but as I have only a limited amount of free time for 'side activities' I find it ... demotivating. As for how this could be improved I have honestly no idea. It would be nice to contribute back to Qt but - for me personally - the entry barrier seems quite high. On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, 16:40 Volker Hilsheimer, <volker.hilshei...@qt.io> wrote: > > On 22 Feb 2022, at 00:34, Mark Gaiser <mark...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Mo, 2022-02-21 at 16:42 +0100, Mark Gaiser wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'm facing so many bugs in QML Controls in Qt6 (they used to be > Controls V2 in the Qt 5.x > >>> days) that I don't want to use them at all anymore. They are bugged > beyond repair and > >>> downright unusable for native desktop integration purposes. > >>> > >>> Is there another good open source component set out there that > integrates with the > >>> desktop. Specifically with Windows but preferably also with Linux (kde > and gnome) and Mac. > >>> > >>> Using QWidgets should not be an alternative as it slows down > development a lot. But given > >>> the crap that QML Controls is makes me consider switching to QWidgets > instead. > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 11:11 PM Bernhard Lindner < > priv...@bernhard-lindner.de> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> QML is nice for basic applications but widgets is important for > professional, technical > >> and high-density applications. > >> > >> But that doesn't matter. From my point of view Qt stopped being > developed as a desktop > >> framework a long time ago. Other industries seems to have priority now. > > > > Well, it was nearly good enough in the Qt5 days with Controls V1. > > All they needed was a better set of controls to accommodate mobile more > and reduce complexity in V1. > > > > What they did - conceptually - with V2 was good. > > But it seems like they just left it in alpha quality and call it "ok" to > replace V1.. That was a mistake. > > It needed much more development time to be a proper replacement. > > > > We're now like ~8 years past the introduction of the V2 set... > > And it still has really severe bugs that just interrupt usability. 8 > years... > > So I doubt it will be getting any better at all. > > > > > Hi All, > > Thanks for keeping it civilised. > > Yes, Qt Quick Controls - and largely the entire Qt Quick framework - were > originally designed for mobile and embedded platforms, and indeed, that > shows when using them for the desktop. > > I’m happy that at least in The Qt Company we are now in a position that > allows us to put more focus on the desktop, and that we are are able to do > more than maintenance and catching up with what’s happening on the > underlying platforms. That includes the journey of making Qt Quick Controls > a great toolkit for the desktop as well. In Qt 6 so far we have had first > implementations of the native styles - yes, those require more work; we > have made a number of improvements to item views, including a TreeView now > in Qt 6.3; a first set of standard dialogs is in Qt 6.2 and more are coming > in 6.3. We have worked on some architectural issues that are problematic on > the desktop, such as keyboard navigation and focus handling, and there is a > fair amount of more work needed there as well. > > I’m not going to claim that all things will be wonderful any moment now; > there’s plenty of work that needs to be done. But things do get better, > both with Qt Quick Controls, and with Qt Widgets as well. > > What keeps confusing me personally is how few people in the community seem > to find it interesting to contribute to either of our UI frameworks in Qt. > If I take one of the QtWidgets issues that came up in this thread: > "QTBUG-6864 is 12 years old, has 47 votes”. I sat down on Tuesday evening > to check what it would take to implement hiding of rows in a QFormLayout; > after a few hours I had a working implementation, which is right now on its > way into the dev branch. The hardest part, as it so often is, was writing a > unit test. > > Now, I understand that not everybody finds it fun to do that kind of thing > on a Tuesday evening. But given the apparently high interest in this > feature, that nobody seems to have tried to give it a shot in 12 years is > really puzzling me. When Nokia acquired Trolltech, it didn’t take a crystal > ball to see that the focus won’t be the desktop. And one answer to this was > to move Qt under Open Governance so that anyone could contribute to Qt and > make sure that it stays awesome also for domains that Nokia won’t care much > about. > > Evidently, the people commenting in this thread care deeply enough about > Qt on the desktop to participate in the discussion. And I suppose most of > us on this list are software engineers, many perhaps for more reasons than > to put food on the table. My question to you is: how can we make it easier, > or more fun, or more motivating to contribute to Qt, and to help with > making things better? > > > Volker > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
