undefined | Better HN

0 pointsoefrha6y ago0 comments

I read the linked email and now I'm even more confused about TFA.

Linked email from KDE:

> But last week, the company suddenly informed both the KDE e.V. board and the KDE Free QT Foundation that the economic outlook caused by the Corona virus puts more pressure on them to increase short-term revenue. As a result, they are thinking about restricting ALL Qt releases to paid license holders for the first 12 months. They are aware that this would mean the end of contributions via Open Governance in practice.

TFA (the entirety):

> There have been discussions on various internet forums about the future of Qt open source in the last two days. The contents do not reflect the views or plans of The Qt Company.

> The Qt Company is proud to be committed to its customers, open source, and the Qt governance model.

So, are they claiming that they never planned to "restrict ALL Qt releases to paid license holders for the first 12 months", or are they saying this plan still counts as "committed to open source"?

0 comments

6 comments · 3 top-level

justinclift6y ago· 2 in thread

>> The Qt Company is proud to be committed to its customers, open source, and the Qt governance model.

Bull.

From January (eg ~2.5 months ago) they've stopped people being able to download the Open Source Windows, macOS, and Linux versions of Qt without first signing up for a "Qt Account".

eg you're now required to be tracked / able to be spammed / (etc) for even the OSS version of Qt.

That's not how companies "committed to Open Source" do things. :(

The crap they're reported as wanting to do now, is right in line with their demonstrated anti-OSS direction.

de_watcher6y ago

That's FUD.

It's in virtually every Linux distribution as binary and source. You don't need a "Qt Account".

justinclift6y ago

It's not FUD.

Grab the official Qt installer, and try downloading anything:

http://download.qt.io/official_releases/online_installers/

It will not work unless you sign in with a Qt Account.

4 more replies

MaxBarraclough6y ago· 1 in thread

Would it even increase their short-term revenue? Users who use the FOSS licence will just wait for the next release, won't they? Unless it's urgent that they use the latest Qt, why would they pay up?

oefrhaOP6y ago

Beats me, I'm certainly not dying to upgrade to Qt6. Now, it will be a nuisance if they withhold security patches for a year, though, so maybe that's what they're counting on? Holding security patches ransom?

AsyncAwait6y ago

They're not saying anything definitive. It's just a move to try and avoid bad PR.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse