Moving the project to Qt might be a good thing for the adoption of PySide itself, as Qt users in need for a scripting solution might be tempted to try it out. Also when the Qt developers are in need for a scripting solution they might reuse PySide instead of inventing something new ( QML... )
On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 20:41 +0200, Matti Airas wrote: > Hi, > > The bigger issue here is that _something_ needs to happen to the > project. It's currently hosted on a Nokia-owned virtual server, and > although I can arrange the hosting to continue, I can only easily extend > it to mid-2012, because that's when my own employment at Nokia will end > as well. Of course, the services could be then moved to some other > virtual server, but I personally don't see how PySide could be better > off by itself than as a Qt add-on. > > More comments below. > > On 11.11.2011 18:54, ext anatoly techtonik wrote: > > 1. Bugtracker > > Jira suxx. It doesn't support OpenID and OAuth, has an ugly theme and > > is too overloaded for PySide (or for me, whatever). > > Actually, I believe using the same bug tracker with Qt would be one of > the bigger practical gains of the change. Whenever a PySide bug turns > out to have a root cause in Qt, it'd become much easier to reassign the > bug, instead of reporting another one and (in the worst case) manually > syncing the contents. > > > 2. Design > > PySide pages has an attractive design and leave a good consistent > > feeling of the project in general. I can't say the same for Qt pages > > and its green-ogre-in-the-cloud theme. It is consistent, but no good. > > I'm not starting a bicycle-shed painting argument here... ;-) > > > 3. Mailing list > > I am quite happy to have a Google Group mirror, and I am not sure it > > will be possible to sync it with a new list anymore. Considering that > > Qt uses the same mailman, there is no gain. > > There would be the gain that someone would host the mailing list, take > care of the backups, etc. The Google Groups mirror is trivial to setup, > no matter where the mailing list would be hosted. > > > 4. Repository > > Gitorious suxx. Just because there is GitHub with pull requests, pages > > and dozen of other nifty features. > > Gitorious is quite slow at times, I admit that much. However, it would > mostly be used as a plain read-only Git repo, since Qt uses Gerrit for > code reviews. From the developer perspective, that would be a > significant improvement to the current situation. GitHub mirrors can be > trivially setup by anyone who wishes to do so. > > > I guess it makes this part - "We welcome any contribution without > > requiring a transfer of copyright." - no longer valid. A pity. An evil > > world is where you need to sign a paper to do something good. > > A copyright transfer would still not be required. And for any new > contributions, it's just a simple click-through (although I admit that > might not be a case for existing contributions, because it's probably > less work to get signatures by email than set up a custom click-through > service for PySide contributions). > > >> The agreement primarily facilitates Nokia's compliance with its commitments > >> under the agreement with the KDE Free Qt Foundation, and enables commercial > >> Qt users to participate in the Qt Project. Most of the Qt code is currently > >> licensed under the LGPL v2.1, so there would not be drastic changes for the > >> PySide open source licensing. > >> > >> [2]http://qt-project.org/legal.html > > I don't understand what stops commercial Qt users from using PySide? > > IIUC after the agreement is signed, you give up all your authorship > > rights and Nokia or Microsoft or Oracle can do whatever they want with > > the license. I doubt they will change the license to MIT of public > > domain. I doubt they won't want constrain open source users more with > > patents and trademarks. So, it doesn't look very positive at all from > > this point of view. > > No, the contribution agreement does NOT make you give up all your > rights. You still have copyright to your code. You do grant a > non-exclusive license for Nokia for the contribution, as well as a > patent license. The explicit patent license is an improvement from the > current situation as it provides certainty for all users that there are > no patent traps in PySide. > > One of the bigger issues why all Qt contributions require a contribution > agreement is the KDE "warranty" agreement: if there are no free versions > of Qt released during 12 months, Qt would fall under a very liberal BSD > variant. [1] This would apply to PySide as well. > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KDE#Licensing > > The commercial licensing of Qt has been sold to Digia, and as a > side-effect of the migration, Digia would acquire rights to sell > commercial versions of PySide. Nokia does not directly benefit from > this, but it would potentially broaden the PySide user base quite a bit, > because many companies are due to internal or external regulation > prohibited from using any open-source software. Commercial use would > provide lots of additional interest in PySide and a direct professional > incentive for supporting and maintaining the project. This would > directly benefit the project and the open source users, just as it does > in Qt proper. > > But yes, back in 2009 when we were planning how to setup the PySide > project, I insisted on not requiring a contribution agreement. I didn't > anticipate how much the situation of MeeGo, and by extension, PySide, > would change. My bad. > > > Well, if you didn't ask - I wouldn't answer. I've got a feeling that > > PySide is going to die, because Nokia can not afford to > > support/sponsor it anymore. So far it was a very pleasant experience, > > and if Qt umbrella is required for PySide project to continue - I > > guess I don't have any other choice than to support that move. > > I don't see the situation as bleak. PySide already has a large number of > users, both open source and commercial, and I expect the interest in a > liberally licensed Python Qt project to increase, not to wane in the future. > > I'm not sure the proposed change would be the only possible way for > PySide to continue, but I genuinely believe it's the best bet for the > project at the moment, due to reasons explained above. > > > Anyway, PySide is awesome! =) > > Thanks! It's the community that makes it great. :-) > > ma. > > _______________________________________________ > PySide mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.pyside.org/listinfo/pyside _______________________________________________ PySide mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pyside.org/listinfo/pyside
