Quoting The Qt Company itslef: Thanks for your feedback to the new online installer asking for a Qt > Account signup. We have evaluated the feedback received via the blog, > various discussion forums, irc and other channels. Based on all these > comments and discussions with our partners we realize that this was not our > finest moment. > Preventing the growth and usage of Qt in the open source community is not > what we want to happen. We did already see a nice jump in the number of Qt > Accounts, > but it was never our intention to make our valued community and > contributors upset with us or stop using and contributing to Qt. > *We clearly ill-calculated how asking for a Qt Account with the online > installer would make our users feel*. A mistake. Sincere apologies. > [...] > *We do hope that this eases your concerns, and that we can continue with > your trust*. > > > > https://www.qt.io/blog/2015/05/06/changing-qt-account-to-be-optional-in-the-online-installer >
So apparently the trust of the QT community os nt a concern anymore... Le lun. 27 janv. 2020 à 15:42, NIkolai Marchenko <enmarantis...@gmail.com> a écrit : > I am afraid I do not have other words for this model than : absolutely > disgusting and a complete dick move. Especially login requirement for > binaries. > I don't even understand how distros are now supposed to keep qt code safe > since constantly pushing qt version up is recipe for problems and there > will be no critical bugfixes to branches that distros were stabilized at. > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:35 PM Lars Knoll <lars.kn...@qt.io> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in the >> future. Please check out https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-offering-changes-2020 >> . >> >> The change consists of three parts. >> >> One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS part >> of a release is in the future going to be restricted to commercial >> customers. All bug fixes will (as agreed on the Qt Contributor Summit) go >> into dev first. Backporting bug fixes is something that the Qt Company will >> take care of for these LTS branches. We’ve seen over the past that LTS >> support is something mainly required by large companies, and should >> hopefully help us get some more commercial support for developing Qt >> further. >> >> The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required for >> binary packages. Source code will continue to be available as currently. >> This will simplify distribution and integration with the Marketplace. In >> addition, we want open source users to contribute to Qt or the Qt >> ecosystem. Doing so is only possible with a valid Qt Account (Jira, code >> review and the forums all require a Qt Account). >> >> The third change is that The Qt Company will in the future also offer a >> lower priced product for small businesses. That small business product is >> btw not limited to mobile like the one Digia had some years ago, but covers >> all of Qt for Device Creation. >> >> None of these changes should affect how Qt is being developed. There >> won’t be any changes to Open Governance or the open development model. >> >> Best regards, >> Lars >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Development mailing list >> Development@qt-project.org >> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >> > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development