On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Sergio PulgarÃn <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, I might be late to the discussion here, but I would like to > share my thoughts anyways. > It is no secret that PySide and PyQt4 are highly compatible > with each other; with a few modifications you can port back > and forth easly, and even create cross-compatible sources. > So basically, at a end user level, there are no (or a few) arguments > to chose one or the other. The real advantage the PySide has over > PyQt4 are the licensing options. PySide has the LGPL option, while > PyQt4 only GPL, last time I checked. I think this alone, makes people > want to use/port to PySide.
That only helps if you are writing a closed-source application. Anyone who want to create an open-source end-user application is not going to care. They are going to base it on things like features, support, how active the community is, what is being used by other projects, and what middle-level python modules they want to use support. For these people, PyQt4 is currently the better choice on all fronts. And these people are exactly the ones who are most likely to want to get involved in and contribute back to pyside if they use it. If pyside is going to succeed, it will have to do so based on something other than license alone. Community, support, and what is being used by other projects is a chicken-and-egg problem, pyside will not have these until it gains some momentum. And it will be hard to get middle-level toolkits to work with pyside exclusively precisely because it is not much harder than supporting both pyqt4 and pyside at the same time, and without much user interest there is no reason to support pyside at all. So if pyside is going to get ahead it I think it needs to have some sort of compelling features that are lacked by PyQt4. I think that is the only way open-source projects are going to use it. _______________________________________________ PySide mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/pyside
